Sounds like a Plan to me.
Ciao,
Rex
At 02:25 PM 2/18/2005, Elysa Jones wrote:
>Hey all,
>I tend to agree that we must focus on our work at hand. Where there are
>people within OASIS that can carry the CAP banner to the upcoming overseas
>conferences, I applaud and support those efforts. However, we have enough
>on our plate and the workers are few. We haven't moved the EDXL
>distribution header along as fast as I had hoped. I'll be putting out the
>agenda for the Tues meeting over the weekend and plan to have as an item
>discussion about a schedule to move EDXL forward. We agreed in our face
>to face meeting at XML2004 to leave the policy/vocabulary issues to those
>that had the proper jurisdiction. There is no reason we can't have input
>and be informed, but we need to try to move on. Let's focus on CAP 1.1 in
>comment and schedule the EDXL work. Elysa
>
>
>At 01:25 PM 2/18/2005, Art Botterell wrote:
>>Friends -
>>
>>In support of comments by Rex and Len... I wonder if we're in danger of
>>letting ourselves get bogged down in other folks' turf battles and grand
>>schemes to the detriment of the specific job we've taken on.
>>
>>Per Len, I'm not sure that a degree of diversity is necessarily a bad
>>thing, considering the relatively early stage such standards efforts are
>>really at, and that we have a mechanism (namespaces) for preventing
>>confusion until the user base / marketplace sorts things out.
>>
>>And per Rex, I'm not sure that either determining the One True Vocabulary
>>or harmonizing multiple standards efforts is really within this TC's
>>scope. Ultimately, only the practitioners can resolve the long-standing
>>questions of interdisciplinary nomenclature. Personally, I'd be inclined
>>to leave those questions to policy-level groups like the EIC and, of
>>course, to the responsible agencies themselves (e.g., the NIMS
>>Integration team).
>>
>>In particular, I'm not sure a full-scale comparison of CAP, EDXL and
>>GJXDM (and IEEE 1512?) is really our job. We've agreed to address a
>>specific set of requirements, which include a fairly specific example
>>vocabulary. In the interests of making tangible progress, might we be
>>wiser to limit ourselves to searching other standards for existing
>>equivalents to the particular items in the EDXL Routing Block
>>requirements as provided by FEMA and EIC?
>>
>>All these larger issues do need attention, at the appropriate time and in
>>the appropriate venues... but I'm suggesting that this TC may get more
>>done by "sticking to our knitting" than by letting ourselves be embroiled
>>into other people's issues.
>>
>>- Art
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
>>the OASIS TC), go to
>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>>
>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
>the OASIS TC), go to
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
>
Rex Brooks
President, CEO, Starbourne Communications Design
Executive Director, Humanmarkup.org, Inc.
1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
510-849-2309
