OASIS Emergency Management TC

Thanks for the update, Carl,

I think we may need to ask OASIS admin about 
this. In practical terms, though, we always need 
to remind implementers to keep a local version of 
these standards and profiles so that they are not 
clogging up the web with endless remote 
validations, not to mention the fact that if/when 
bit parity across the network finally slips that 
one 0 or 1 too far, which is inevitable, whole 
networks using a given standard can crash when 
validation fails. That otherwise very bright 
people can forget this is undeniable proof of the 
existence of Murphy.

Cheers,
Rex

At 8:51 AM -0400 10/5/06, creed@opengeospatial.org wrote:
>I will be in a meeting all afternoon.
>
>However, an update on the GML profile for use in OASIS.  We had a meeting
>of the GML Working Group at our OGC TC meetings and worked through the
>definition of a schema. More work is required. However, there was the
>question of how to specify the namespace. The OGC recommended way to to
>use the ogc/gml namespace. There are reasons for this. But, it is possible
>to decouple the GML schemas from the GML namespace if required. The
>downside of this latter approach is that applications that can ingest full
>GML will not recognize the GML payload being processed. This may not be an
>issue for a simple GML profile. The other question from the group was
>about where the schemas should reside. FYI, the OGC maintains a schema
>repository. This is more an issue of who will be responsible for the long
>term maintenance of the GML profile for OASIS.
>
>So, we need some guidance from this group. Perhaps this could be discussed
>a bit today.
>
>Thanks and regards
>
>Carl
>
>
>>  All,
>>
>>  Everyone’s schedule is very tight, but the best alternative (for Sukumar
>>  as
>>  well) is Thursday, Oct. 5 (tomorrow) at 4:30 ET.
>>
>>
>>
>>  The purpose is to give HAVE one final walk-through before submitting to
>>  the
>>  TC for public comment.  We’ve discussed that we’ll address Renato’s
>>  comments
>>  where ‘easy”; otherwise forward those comments into public comment along
>>  with the draft and address them there.
>>
>>
>>
>>  1-800-320-4330
>>
>>  327547#
>>
>>
>>
>>  Thanks,
>>
>>  Tim
>>
>>
>>
>>     _____
>>
>>  From: Tim Grapes [mailto:tgrapes@evotecinc.com]
>>  Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:28 PM
>>  To: Sukumar Dwarkanath
>>  Cc: Emergency_Mgt_Msg_SC
>>  Subject: [emergency-msg] Date/Time final HAVE review
>>
>>
>>
>>  Hi Sukumar,
>>
>>
>>
>>  I know schedules have been tough, but we want to try again to schedule one
>>  final HAVE review before submitting to TC vote and public comment.  We’d
>>  like to walk the spec end to end, deal with any easy ones on Renato’s
>>  comment list, and submit the remaining comments along with the draft into
>>  public comment.
>>
>>
>>
>>  Everyone:  Please respond about these proposed dates, and we’ll schedule
>>  based upon that.
>>
>>
>>
>>  1)       Thurs Oct. 5 4:30 ET
>>
>>  2)       Fri Oct. 6 11:00 ET
>>
>>
>>
>>  Thanks,
>>
>>  Tim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>  Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.12/461 - Release Date: 10/2/2006
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>  Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.12/461 - Release Date: 10/2/2006
>>
>>


-- 
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-849-2309