OASIS Emergency Management TC

 View Only

Re: [emergency] Subcommittee Assignments

  • 1.  Re: [emergency] Subcommittee Assignments

    Posted 11-04-2005 02:54
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    emergency message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


    Subject: Re: [emergency] Subcommittee Assignments


    
    
    On 4 Nov 2005, at 03:52, Elysa Jones wrote:
    
    > 1.  Infrastructure SC - The DE has now completed the comment period  
    > and we reviewed an overview of the comments received.  Mary  
    > provided a URL to the comment list.  Art is putting together the  
    > spread sheet with all comments for consideration.  As Mary stated  
    > on the call, for the EDXL DE 1.0 to be voted on this calendar year,  
    > it will have to be approved by the TC to go forward no later than  
    > Nov 7.  I would like for the IF-SC to work diligently over the next  
    > few days to provide a recommendation to the TC as to the dispense  
    > of these comments.  I will call a special meeting of the TC on  
    > Tuesday Nov 7 from 11-12 EST for the IF-SC to make their  
    > recommendations.  Provided we have a quorum and can agree to the IF- 
    > SC dispense, we could vote at that meeting to go forward with a ballot
    
    My concern is that we seem to be pushing thru EDXL-DE when we have no  
    experience on
    how (or if) the work we now commence on EDXL-RM will impact on it.
    
    This was the case for CAP and EDXL - changes proposed in EDXL were  
    rejected because
    CAP did things in certain ways.
    
    I am concerned the same will now happen with EDXL-RM - since its  
    dependency on EDXL-DE is high.
    
    I suggest the EDXL-DE stay at committee draft for a longer period  
    until we are more clear
    on the technical integration with EDXL-RM. This would be the best  
    outcome for the community we represent.
    
    
    > 2.  Messaging SC - Now that the requirements for Resource has been  
    > through the review, I would like to see the messaging SC take over  
    > that work.
    
    Where are these Requirements? Were these discussed at the last f2f?
    
    
    Cheers...  Renato Iannella
    National ICT Australia (NICTA)
    
    
    
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This email and any attachments may be confidential. They may contain legally
    privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy,
    use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended
    recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both
    messages. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus,
    data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised
    amendment. This notice should not be removed.
    


    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]