MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->


















emergency message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: Re: [emergency] Draft TC Letter on HazCollect




From: "Carl Reed OGC Account" <creed@opengeospatial.org>
To: <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>,       "Elysa Jones" <ejones@warningsystems.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:33:04 -0600






My one concern is the use of the phrase, "non-compliant implementation". 
What is a compliant implementation? In the standards world, compliance 
suggests a rigorous testing framework in which assertions (rules) as 
specified in the standard are specifically tested against a given 
implementation. The OGC has almost 4 years experience in building and 
providing compliance testing for a number of our core standards. This 
framework determines that a product implementation of a particular 
Specification fulfills all mandatory elements as specified and that these 
elements are operable. There is significant value to an organization or 
vendor in having their implementation of a given standard pass a compliance 
test.

I am not trying to be overly sticky on the semantics, but if I were on the 
NOAA side, I would ask the question "and what exactly do you mean by 
compliance?"

Also, just to stir the pot a bit, even compliance does not insure 
interoperability. Interoperability testing is a whole other topic.

OGC is not the only organization that provide compliance testing. So does 
ISO, IEEE, the ITU, and many other standards organizations.

Regards

Carl