OASIS Emergency Management TC

  • 1.  RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary =?UTF-8?Q?alignment=3F?=

    Posted 07-13-2009 21:18 
    Tim,

    Intriguing!

    Good news however is that I received a response from Donna Roy on the LinkedIn NIEm focus group - saying that 2.1 should address gaps in domains - and that beta will be available for review.

    So I'm feeling more relaxed about this - and look forward to reviewing when available.  Obviously I'll let our team here know as soon as I hear anything in that regard. 
     
    Thanks, DW


  • 2.  RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment?

    Posted 07-14-2009 13:06 
    










    


    David,
    


    


    Actually this could be headed in the direction of a true
interoperability issue.  It appears that you do not see the value of keeping
HAVE and other EDXL standards (and perhaps the many other standards out there) as
separate, approved  external standards in the NIEM world.   This is
absolutely essential – attempting to force all of EDXL and other standards into
NIEM will only cause difficulty for BOTH sets of efforts.  There are many
examples and arguments that may be cited. 
    


    


    Using adapters for NIEM to connect to the approved standard plus
providing NIEM access to an emergency management data dictionary makes sense
and adds value, but attempting to “integrate” EDXL into NIEM will get in the
way of real usability in the long run.  
    


    


    


    Thanks,
    


    Tim Grapes
    


    Evotec
    


    


    "When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt"
    


    - Henry J. Kaiser
    


    


    


    


    


    From: David RR Webber
(XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
    
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 5:18 PM
    
To: Timothy Grapes
    
Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Lee Tincher'
    
Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment?
    


    


    


    


    


    Tim,
    


    


    


    


    


    


    Intriguing!
    


    


    


    


    


    


    Good news however is that I received a response from Donna Roy on
the LinkedIn NIEm focus group - saying that 2.1 should address gaps in domains
- and that beta will be available for review.
    


    


    


    


    


    


    So I'm feeling more relaxed about this - and look forward to
reviewing when available.  Obviously I'll let our team here know as soon
as I hear anything in that regard. 
    


    


    


     
    


    


    


    Thanks, DW
    


    


    


    



    
                                                
    
					
                                                    

        
                                                
				
    
                                                
    
                                                    
                                                        
                                                        Original Message
                                                
    
                                                
    


    


    


    This is a much more complicated issue than can  be discussed
via email. The issue has been worked literally for years, and now again another
effort to work with NIEM without them enforcing rules that do not work for this
domain and without breaking EDXL standards.  We need to let the governance
and this “pilot” that is being put forth to play out.  That governance is
through a partnership between OIC and FEMA with the knowledge  and cooperation
of OASIS and others that have tracked this issue for so long.  It may now
get solved in 2.1 (or at least a path forward for governance and cooperation),
but we’ll see.
    


    


    


     
    


    


    


    


    Thanks,
    


    


    Tim Grapes
    


    


    


    Evotec
    


    


    


    


    "When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt"
    


    


    


    - Henry J. Kaiser
    


    


    


    


     
    


    


    


    


    


    From: David
RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
    
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 8:44 PM
    
To: Lee Tincher
    
Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
    
Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE
and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment?
    


    


    


    


    


     
    


    


    


    


    Lee,
    


    


    


    


    


     
    


    


    


    


    


    I'm looking for one piece of XML - no xslt band-aiding and most
certainly NOT one standard for use - and another for publication in the IEPD.
 The schema et al in the IEPD should be identical to what is being used in
actual production. 
    


    


    


    


    


     
    


    


    


    


    Thanks, DW

  • 3.  RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment?

    Posted 07-14-2009 14:14 
    Hi Folks,

Just so y'all know, MITRE will be getting into 
this now that they're as an FFRDC for DHS CIO 
office/department. I just gave a brief overview 
of the fact that OASIS EDXL scope is 
international unless specifically identified as a 
national effort, e.g. CAP-IPAWS Profile, while 
NIEM is national in scope and UCORE is 
national-governmental in scope.

In case I didn't repeat the "s" word enough, the 
overlaps for interoperability need to be 
addressed in terms of scope. I don't think that 
aligning or harmonizing various EDXL 
vocabularies/datamodels with NIEM necessarily 
involves subordinating or attempting to contain 
EDXL within NIEM, but since I don't work with 
this day in day out, I'll let those who do 
explain where the rough patches occur.

I'm confident that with sufficient open 
communication, we can get these various efforts 
working together.

Cheers,
Rex

At 9:06 AM -0400 7/14/09, Timothy Grapes wrote:
>David,
>
>Actually this could be headed in the direction 
>of a true interoperability issue.  It appears 
>that you do not see the value of keeping HAVE 
>and other EDXL standards (and perhaps the many 
>other standards out there) as separate, approved 
> external standards in the NIEM world.   This is 
>absolutely essential - attempting to force all 
>of EDXL and other standards into NIEM will only 
>cause difficulty for BOTH sets of efforts. 
> There are many examples and arguments that may 
>be cited.
>
>Using adapters for NIEM to connect to the 
>approved standard plus providing NIEM access to 
>an emergency management data dictionary makes 
>sense and adds value, but attempting to 
>"integrate" EDXL into NIEM will get in the way 
>of real usability in the long run.
>Thanks,
>Tim Grapes
>Evotec
>"When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt"
>- Henry J. Kaiser
>
>From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
>Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 5:18 PM
>To: Timothy Grapes
>Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Lee Tincher'
>Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment?
>
>Tim,
>
>Intriguing!
>
>Good news however is that I received a response 
>from Donna Roy on the LinkedIn NIEm focus group 
>- saying that 2.1 should address gaps in domains 
>- and that beta will be available for review.
>
>So I'm feeling more relaxed about this - and 
>look forward to reviewing when available. 
> Obviously I'll let our team here know as soon 
>as I hear anything in that regard.
>
>Thanks, DW
>
>
    
                                                
    
					
                                                    

        
                                                
				
    
                                                
    
                                                    
                                                        
                                                        Original Message


Related Content