OJP compliance with jxdm - definition and requirement

["Poindexter, Gary" <gary.poindexter@bearingpoint.com>]

This is a cross post, a similar item was sent to the Emergency Management TC.

If you haven't read the OJP definition of compliance with the jxdm at http://it.ojp.gov/topic.jsp?topic_id=138 then I encourage you to do so. The definition of compliance is in the context of how a schema is constructed. The statement at the bottom of the page then says that all project funded by OJP must be "compliant" with the jxdm. I believe that there are some fundamental issues:

1) Compliance to the jxdm has nothing whatsoever to do with how a schema is constructed. It has to do with the construct of the resulting instances.
2) The definition of compliance is overly and unnecessarily restrictive.
3) The definition of compliance makes the "model" a "standard." The first draft of the model is not yet suitable for being promoted as a standard.
4) To imply that interoperability is somehow promoted or enabled by defining how we create schemas is ludicrous.

gary

Gary Poindexter | BearingPoint | Manager, SLED | Minneapolis, MN
Phone 612-305-5424 | Mobile 651-245-5958| Fax 413-521-9309
gary.poindexter@bearingpoint.com | www.bearingpoint.com

***************************************************************************************************
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.  Access to this email by anyone other than the intended addressee is unauthorized.  If you are not the intended recipient of this message, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, retention, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to or forward a copy of this message to the sender and delete the message, any attachments, and any copies thereof from your system.
***************************************************************************************************