OASIS Emergency Management TC

 View Only

RE: [emergency] FW: [legalxml-intjustice] GJXDM subset schema exa mple and documen tation

  • 1.  RE: [emergency] FW: [legalxml-intjustice] GJXDM subset schema exa mple and documen tation

    Posted 03-23-2004 15:20
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    emergency message

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


    Subject: RE: [emergency] FW: [legalxml-intjustice] GJXDM subset schema exa mple and documen tation


    That we need them, I agree.  That this is the intent of 
    the TC, I agree.  Neither of us are naive about the long 
    haul from specification to standardization.  Too many out 
    there believe they can enter a group, create a spec, 
    stamp standard on it and dominate a market by years' end.
     
    It is too much like the music business in that respect. 
    A hit will put a group in the spotlight, but it takes 
    three albums full of hits to sustain a long career, so 
    the bands only want to record hits and songwriters 
    compete ferociously for their attention.
    
    http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040316/165150_1.html
    
    A standards group finds itself in the position 
    of a songwriter trying to get bands with a big following to 
    record their songs, or they have to have their 
    own solo careers.
    
    CAP needs to be on a hit album.  One looks for the
    equivalent of the songplugger who can control the 
    local playlists of some market.  It is the modern 
    version of payola.  To sell CAP, it has to be 
    sold to the state agencies.  That's probably obvious 
    from where you sit.
    
    len
    
    
    From: R. Allen Wyke [mailto:emergency-tc@earthlink.net]
    
    Well put.
    
    As a side note, I did want to comment (personally) on this one 
    section....
    
    > Anyway, you might want to adjust your concepts to
    > differentiate specifications and standards.  CAP
    > and Global Justice are specifications for systems
    > groups want to create.  NIBRS and UCR are standards
    > for systems that do exist and are in widespread use.
    > It isn't smart to bet the farm on a specification.
    > It is smart to develop them as affordable.  I'd say
    > you definitely want CAP to be part of Global Justice.
    
    I do, IMHO, agree that this is where CAP is - its a specification. 
    However, and I can say this as Chair, the primary author of both the 
    Charter and Requirements Document, and as a CTO of a company that 
    targets both public safety AND business continuity as markets, this was 
    NOT the intention of this TC. It was to create standards - not specs. 
    Their are 10,000,000,000 different XML schemas out there - they are a 
    dime-a-dozen. We do not need more - they are hard enough to sort out. 
    What we need are standards - standards for doing things such as 
    exchanging Alert information - not just describing it.
    
    Allen
    


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