RE: Fw: [emergency] RE: EDXL-HAVE spec questions

[ltincher@evotecinc.com]

Yes Bill - there are astill a few problems to overcome - I am working with
Google and OASIS today - I'll get you an update tonight...

Thanks!
Lee

> Lee-
>
>
>
> To an non-xml expert (the last major programming I did was a patient
> appointing  and physician scheduling system in MUMPS on an AT&T 3B2
> mini-computer...that was more than a couple of years ago!), the sample
> you did looks great from a functional point-of-view.  I know the Google
> folks had some important technical questions, but from a functional
> standpoint, I only have a couple of questions/issues to bring up:
>
>
>
> -          One small issue is that at the meeting we had on Friday, it
> sounded to me like we need to specifically track mobile clinics.  I was
> thinking that should be in the constrained list for FacilityType.
>
> -          On contact information, we had included some profile
> definitions so we know what the numbers represent (e.g., PrimaryPOCName,
> POCPhone, POCEmail...and I notice I had left out "FacilityPhone" and
> "EmergencyPhone" as important fields to track...but probably in the same
> list.  Just a phone number by itself can be confusing for trying to
> decide which number is important to use depending on the situation.
>
>
>
> There are some additional thoughts, but some are more for a long term
> discussion with the OASIS group (such as there should probably be a way
> to formally define the country that a phone number is located in (since
> global mobility has made it such that the country the person is located
> in is not necessarily the county number system that you would use to
> dial the phone) so that a receiving system can better determine what the
> digits represent...but free text works for now!)
>
>
>
> But this looks great.  Pending the outcome of the OASIS discussion and
> resolution of Google's issues, is the next step a profile document?
>
>
>
> -Bill
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Lee Tincher [mailto:ltincher@evotecinc.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 8:23 AM
> To: 'Sukumar Dwarkanath'; Bill Lang; kpy@google.com
> Cc: momander@google.com; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org;
> Denis.Gusty@dhs.gov; bill.kalin@associates.dhs.gov;
> jeff.waters@gmail.com; sukumar_dwarkanath@sra.com
> Subject: RE: Fw: [emergency] RE: EDXL-HAVE spec questions
>
>
>
> Sukumar - I am sorry but that is only part of the problem.
>
>
>
> The following 2 are not about the example - but real world broken
> problems in the Schema...
>
>
>
> 1. The <xpil:OrganisationInfo> element seems to be in the wrong order.
> According to the schema, it seems it should appear between
> <xnl:OrganisationName> and <xpil:Addresses>, not after <xpil:Addresses>.
> Can you confirm?
>
>
>
> 2. The example has a <have:TriageCount> element, but there is no such
> XML element in the schema.  According to the schema, it seems that
> <have:TriageCodeListURN> and <have:TriageCode> should be immediate
> children of  <have:EMSCapacity>.  Can you confirm?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lee
>
>
>
> Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the
> public and have no self.  - Cyril Connolly
> <http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Cyril_Connolly/>
>
>
>
> From: Sukumar Dwarkanath [mailto:sukumar.dwarkanath@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 8:10 AM
> To: wllang@shoreland.com; kpy@google.com; ltincher@evotecinc.com
> Cc: momander@google.com; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org;
> Denis.Gusty@dhs.gov; bill.kalin@associates.dhs.gov;
> jeff.waters@gmail.com; sukumar_dwarkanath@sra.com
> Subject: Re: Fw: [emergency] RE: EDXL-HAVE spec questions
>
>
>
>
>
> Folks,
>
>
>
> From the questions, it looks like all the questions pertain to the
> example included in the Standard. The sample was provided to illustrate
> a few concepts and will not validate. Jeff and I have been working on
> providing a package with all the schemas and examples that one will need
> - I have attached the zipped file. Both of us have checked and the files
> do validate - please let us know if you have any issues.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Sukumar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Dwarkanath, Sukumar - INTL
> <Sukumar_Dwarkanath@sra.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee Tincher <ltincher@evotecinc.com>
> To: 'Ka-Ping Yee' <kpy@google.com>; 'Bill Lang' <wllang@shoreland.com>
> CC: 'Roni Zeiger' <zeiger@google.com>; 'Martin Omander'
> <momander@google.com>; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
> <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>; 'Gusty, Denis' <Denis.Gusty@dhs.gov>;
> 'William Kalin' <bill.kalin@associates.dhs.gov>
> Sent: Mon Mar 01 07:14:01 2010
> Subject: [emergency] RE: EDXL-HAVE spec questions
>
> Ka-Ping,
>
>
>
> You are correct in all points on the new Errata.  I have been in contact
> with OASIS to get this clarified/fixed ASAP.  The PR4 errata does not
> have many of these errors (but has some other ones)...
>
>
>
> All - we need this clarified as soon as we can - this is excessively
> important to the success of HAVE in the Haiti response.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lee
>
>
>
> Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the
> public and have no self.  - Cyril Connolly
> <http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Cyril_Connolly/>
>
>
>
> From: Ka-Ping Yee [mailto:kpy@google.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 5:27 AM
> To: Lee Tincher; Bill Lang
> Cc: Roni Zeiger; Martin Omander
> Subject: EDXL-HAVE spec questions
>
>
>
> Hello Lee,
>
>
> I've run into a couple of problems with the EDXL specification, and was
> hoping you could help out?
>
>
>
> This is the document I'm using:
>
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/edxl-have/os/emergency_edxl_have-1.
> 0-spec-os.pdf
>
>
>
> (This is the link listed at
> http://www.oasis-open.org/specs/index.php#edxlhave.)
>
>
>
> And this is the XSD schema I'm using:
>
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/edxl-have/os/edxl-have-os.xsd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> First, a few things that look like simple typos in the EDXL-HAVE example
> document (Appendix A):
>
>
>
> 1. The <xpil:OrganisationInfo> element seems to be in the wrong order.
> According to the schema, it seems it should appear between
> <xnl:OrganisationName> and <xpil:Addresses>, not after <xpil:Addresses>.
> Can you confirm?
>
>
>
> 2. The example has a <have:TriageCount> element, but there is no such
> XML element in the schema.  According to the schema, it seems that
> <have:TriageCodeListURN> and <have:TriageCode> should be immediate
> children of  <have:EMSCapacity>.  Can you confirm?
>
>
>
> 3. The example has a <have:Offload> element, but there is no such XML
> element in the schema.  According to the schema, it seems that
> <have:EMSOffloadStatus> and <have:EMSOffloadMinutes> should be immediate
> children of <have:EMSAmbulanceStatus>.  Can you confirm?
>
>
>
> 4. The example has a <have:AdultGeneralSugery> element, which I assume
> is a typographic error and should be <have:AdultGeneralSurgery>.  Can
> you confirm?
>
>
>
>
>
> Second, though, a more concerning problem with the BedCapacity section
> (Section 3.2.4):
>
>
>
> The text, and example 1, suggest that the <have:BedCapacity> element
> should contain a (<BedType>, <Capacity>) pair, followed by any number of
> (<SubCategoryBedType>, <Capacity>) pairs.
>
>
>
> However, example 1 doesn't validate.  The XSD schema doesn't allow for
> this structure; it only allows zero or more <BedType> elements, followed
> by zero or more <SubCategoryBedType> elements, followed by zero or more
> <Capacity> elements.
>
>
>
> I can't figure out how to properly represent or interpret bed capacities
> in this structure.  Can you advise on the correct method?  If it is true
> that this just doesn't work as intended, should we decide to use only
> <BedType> and avoid the use of <SubCategoryBedType> in the EDXL-HAVE
> Haiti Profile?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Many thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Ping
> Technical Lead, Google Person Finder
>
>
>
>