MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
emergency message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Forwarded note from David Ellis
Elysa
Thank you so much for the opportunity to participate in the CAP 1.1
standardization process. Sandia National Laboratories is managed by
Lockheed Martin and Tom can explain the type of membership they have with
OASIS. If necessary I could purchase an individual membership or I
could continue to work through Tom. I would prefer directly
interacting with the EM TC because CAP and/or EDXL are going to be
critical to the development of a national alerting system.
In that regards, I would like to began using CAP 1.1 to develop the CBRNE
sensor network which would be a part of the DoD (alerting Framework) and
the DHS (DMIS). There are many Government agencies and companies
which are a part of this effort (DoD JRO, North Command, DTRA, JPM-IS,
the National Guard, the DOE National Laboratories represented by Sandia
National Laboratories, Applied Research Associates, Inc, Applied
Innovation Inc, Ensco Inc, Northrup Grumman, NuParadigm, RTI, SAIC,
Sentel, and Sys technologies.) If we are going to make some
critical deadlines, we need to start using the CAP 1.1 format
immediately. What is the policy of using the proposed CAP 1.1 in
our R&D effort in order to synchronies warning system deployment with
the CAP 1.1 release?
Justification of Immediate needs: There also
other parts of this emerging network which need the new functionality of
CAP 1.1. One is directing the elevation of Force Protection
Condition from SAIC ASOCC to JPEN which could use the new
<instruction> tag. Another is the Guardian program for
directing protective actions during a CBRNE attack. Our CBRNE
Sensor program needs to use the <derefUri> tag to pass sensor and
video data.
NOTE on Null String Comment: The data dictionary for
code element in both the CAP 1.0 and 1.1 states �Any user-defined flag or
special code used to flag the alert message for special handling�.
This causes many programmers to think of this as a status integer or some
numeric priority code for the message. Because this is a string and
null is allowed if other CAP implementers sends the code tag with blank
content the programs using non-string content often fail. If there
is a best practices policy, CAP programs should not send optional tags
with null content and should perform checks for now string uses of
tags. I am open to helping work some implementation and/or testing
guidance.
Attached is a Poster presented at the Conference on Science and
Technology for Chem-Bio Information Systems on 19-21 October 2004 at
Williamsburg Virginia. Please forward to appropriate committee
members to explain the urgency for CAP 1.1.
David E. Ellis
Information Management Architect
(505) 844-6697
Poster Design1.pdf
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]