MHonArc v2.4.5 -->
emergency message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emergency] Adapted Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter - First draftfor discussion (from Gary Ham)
Hi Gary,
Regarding your confusion over the scope of the Adapted Infrastructure Charter;
I specifically used the word "Adapted" to allow for the broadest possible work-product scope and intended that, as a group, we would hash out the concerns you raise, as well as others that will undoubtedly surface by the time we are together. I understand your interest, as well as the differences between "pure" underlying infrastructure versus registry and management of user communities, versus process deployment as a practical matter, and thought that these topics would be most easily, and rapidly, addressed face-to-face. Ergo, the non-specific language in my initial statement which was simply intended to establish what intellectual "region" we intended to work in.
Rick
-----"R. Allen Wyke" <emtc@nc.rr.com> wrote: -----
To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
From: "R. Allen Wyke" <emtc@nc.rr.com>
Date: 03/31/2003 01:51PM
Subject: RE: [emergency] Adapted Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter - First draft for discussion (from Gary Ham)
Forwarded on behalf of Gary...
-----Forwarded Message-----
> From: "Ham, Gary A" <hamg@BATTELLE.ORG>
> To: 'emtc@nc.rr.com' <emtc@nc.rr.com>
> Subject: RE: [emergency] Adapted Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter - Fir st draft for discussion
> Date: 31 Mar 2003 15:51:18 -0500
>
> I tried to sent the following to the mailing list but was bounced. I am
> getting posts. I just cannot send them.
>
> Regarding the Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter:
> I am a bit confused. Are we talking standards for information or for process
> or for both? Or are we also talking about the actual control function of the
> "information space" for the emergency information? Or the information
> parameters to be shared which would facilitate that control. I think that we
> need a bit more in the way of specifics in the statement of purpose. The
> scope is still a bit cloudy to me.
> Over time, I believe that it will be in the Federal interest to establish an
> official infrastructure for information sharing in a controlled environment.
> This organization and facilitation of such a controlled "information space"
> available to all who are authorized is the primary (and fully approved) goal
> of the DHS Disaster Management eGov initiative. It is the essential charter
> for the program. Industry standards play an important role in assuring that
> the interfaces to this controlled information space are clean and well
> understood such that all commercial efforts have the ability to share on a
> fair and equal basis. More importantly, it allows the information content
> that can be shared to grow because the growth of effective commercial
> applications will provide far more substance, sooner, to our responders and
> the citizens they support.
> The Disaster Management Initiative is therefore committed to implementing
> effective commercial standards within its official interoperability
> infrastructure. That these standards might be used for less official (even
> uncontrolled) information exchanges is also not a bad thing. There needs to
> be some flexibility in the information space. The controlled space (like
> controlled airspace for commercial aviation) is an inherently governmental
> function.
> Respectfully,
> Gary Ham
>