EM Infrastructure Framework SC

 View Only
Back to discussions
Expand all | Collapse all

Re: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F meeting

  • 1.  Re: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F meeting

    Posted 03-03-2010 06:47 
    








    
I agree. Let's figure out a way to make <targetArea> more extensible in order to support other pre-defined boundaries like FIPS and Canadian SGC and not just be limited to UN Locodes.

    -hans
    --
    Hans Jespersen
    (650) 924-2674
    

    

From: Doug Allport 
    



    


    Hans
    


    


    I believe locCodeUN was to allow for a user defined valueName
and values consistent with CAP. You may recall I was making the case for FIPS
and Canadian SGC use. 
    


    


    


    Cheers,
    


    


    Doug Allport
    


    Executive Director
    


    Canadian Association for Public Alerting and Notification
(CAPAN)
    


    Doug.Allport@CAPAN.ca 
    


    (613) 271-1040 Tel
    


    (613) 294-4425 Blackberry
    


    www.CAPAN.ca
    


    


    


    


    


    


    From: Hans Jespersen
[mailto:Hans.Jespersen@SolaceSystems.com]
    
Sent: March-02-10 12:57 AM
    
To: emergency-if@lists.oasis-open.org
    
Subject: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F
meeting
    


    


    


    


    I
took a crack at updating the older strawman EDXL-DE 1.1 spec (attached) to
reflect the changes I committed to making at the TCIP show F2F. 
    


    


    The
changes were as follows:
    


    


    -      
I made the spec into version 2.0 instead of
version 1.1
    


    -      
I changed the type of the newly added
<replyTo> and <errorTo> elements to be the same complex type as the
element <explictAddress> (which is a type called “valueSchemeType”)
    


    -      
I removed the complex types “replyToType” and “authenticationType” since they are no longer used for
the <replyTo>
and <errorTo> elements
    


    -      
I moved <replyTo> and <errorTo>
elements down to appear just after <explicitAddress> since the elements
must appear in a specific order (being that they are defined as a sequence) and
it makes more sense to group all the explicitAddress(es) together
    


    -      
I changed the <xmlContent> element name
to <contentXML> so it would be compliant with the xml naming rules. I
also renamed the complex type from “xmlContentType” to “contentXMLType” to be
consistent (and just in case there are similar naming rules for types as well)
    


    


    I think that reflects all the schema
changes I was tasked with. I do have other action items which we can discuss on
the call today (Mar 02)
    


    


    -hans
    


    


    -- 
    


    Hans Jespersen
    


    Principal Systems Engineer
    


    Solace Systems Inc.
    


    2051 Landings Drive, Mountain View, CA
94043
    


    Phone: (650) 924-2670
    


    hans.jespersen@solacesystems.com
    


    http://www.solacesystems.com


  • 2.  RE: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2Fmeeting

    Posted 03-04-2010 12:06 
    I would be interested in assisting with this effort.  Let me know if we should setup a time to chat outside of the IF to come up with a plan…
    -Don
    Office: 315-838-2669
    Cell: 315-383-1197
    dmcgarry@mitre.org
    From: Hans Jespersen [mailto:Hans.Jespersen@SolaceSystems.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 1:47 AM
    To: doug@allportgroup.com; emergency-if@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: Re: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F meeting
    I agree. Let's figure out a way to make <targetArea> more extensible in order to support other pre-defined boundaries like FIPS and Canadian SGC and not just be limited to UN Locodes.

    -hans
    --
    Hans Jespersen
    (650) 924-2674
    From: Doug Allport
    To: emergency-if@lists.oasis-open.org
    Sent: Tue Mar 02 22:03:58 2010
    Subject: RE: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F meeting 
    Hans
    I believe locCodeUN was to allow for a user defined valueName and values consistent with CAP. You may recall I was making the case for FIPS and Canadian SGC use. 
    Cheers,
    Doug Allport
    Executive Director
    Canadian Association for Public Alerting and Notification (CAPAN)
    Doug.Allport@CAPAN.ca 
    (613) 271-1040 Tel
    (613) 294-4425 Blackberry
    www.CAPAN.ca
    From: Hans Jespersen [mailto:Hans.Jespersen@SolaceSystems.com]
    Sent: March-02-10 12:57 AM
    To: emergency-if@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F meeting
    I took a crack at updating the older strawman EDXL-DE 1.1 spec (attached) to reflect the changes I committed to making at the TCIP show F2F. 
    The changes were as follows:
    -       I made the spec into version 2.0 instead of version 1.1
    -       I changed the type of the newly added <replyTo> and <errorTo> elements to be the same complex type as the element <explictAddress> (which is a type called “valueSchemeType”)
    -       I removed the complex types “replyToType” and “authenticationType” since they are no longer used for the <replyTo> and <errorTo> elements
    -       I moved <replyTo> and <errorTo> elements down to appear just after <explicitAddress> since the elements must appear in a specific order (being that they are defined as a sequence) and it makes more sense to group all the explicitAddress(es) together
    -       I changed the <xmlContent> element name to <contentXML> so it would be compliant with the xml naming rules. I also renamed the complex type from “xmlContentType” to “contentXMLType” to be consistent (and just in case there are similar naming rules for types as well)
    I think that reflects all the schema changes I was tasked with. I do have other action items which we can discuss on the call today (Mar 02)
    -hans
    -- 
    Hans Jespersen
    Principal Systems Engineer
    Solace Systems Inc.
    2051 Landings Drive, Mountain View, CA 94043
    Phone: (650) 924-2670
    hans.jespersen@solacesystems.com
    http://www.solacesystems.com


  • 3.  RE: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F meeting

    Posted 03-04-2010 18:18 
    











    


    Would this be best handled in the GIS subcommittee?
    


    


    Rob
    


    


    


    


    From: McGarry, Donald P.
[mailto:dmcgarry@mitre.org]
    
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 4:06 AM
    
To: Hans Jespersen; doug@allportgroup.com;
emergency-if@lists.oasis-open.org
    
Subject: RE: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP
F2F meeting
    


    


    


    


    I would be interested in assisting with this effort.  Let
me know if we should setup a time to chat outside of the IF to come up with a
plan…
    


    


    


    -Don
    


    Office: 315-838-2669
    


    Cell: 315-383-1197
    


    dmcgarry@mitre.org
    


    


    


    


    


    From: Hans Jespersen
[mailto:Hans.Jespersen@SolaceSystems.com]
    
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 1:47 AM
    
To: doug@allportgroup.com; emergency-if@lists.oasis-open.org
    
Subject: Re: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP
F2F meeting
    


    


    


    


    I agree. Let's figure out a way to make <targetArea> more
extensible in order to support other pre-defined boundaries like FIPS and
Canadian SGC and not just be limited to UN Locodes.

    
-hans
    
--
    
Hans Jespersen
    
(650) 924-2674
    


    


    


    


    From: Doug Allport
    
To: emergency-if@lists.oasis-open.org
    
Sent: Tue Mar 02 22:03:58 2010
    
Subject: RE: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP
F2F meeting 
    


    Hans
    


    


    I believe locCodeUN was to allow for a user
defined valueName and values consistent with CAP. You may recall I was making
the case for FIPS and Canadian SGC use. 
    


    


    


    Cheers,
    


    


    Doug Allport
    


    Executive Director
    


    Canadian Association for Public Alerting
and Notification (CAPAN)
    


    Doug.Allport@CAPAN.ca

    


    (613) 271-1040 Tel
    


    (613) 294-4425 Blackberry
    


    www.CAPAN.ca
    


    


    


    


    


    


    From: Hans Jespersen
[mailto:Hans.Jespersen@SolaceSystems.com]
    
Sent: March-02-10 12:57 AM
    
To: emergency-if@lists.oasis-open.org
    
Subject: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F
meeting
    


    


    


    


    I took a crack at updating the older strawman EDXL-DE 1.1
spec (attached) to reflect the changes I committed to making at the TCIP show F2F.

    


    


    The changes were as follows:
    


    


    -       I
made the spec into version 2.0 instead of version 1.1
    


    -       I
changed the type of the newly added <replyTo> and <errorTo>
elements to be the same complex type as the element <explictAddress>
(which is a type called “valueSchemeType”)
    


    -       I
removed the complex types “replyToType” and “authenticationType”
since they are no longer used for the <replyTo> and
<errorTo> elements
    


    -       I
moved <replyTo> and <errorTo> elements down to appear just after
<explicitAddress> since the elements must appear in a specific order
(being that they are defined as a sequence) and it makes more sense to group
all the explicitAddress(es) together
    


    -       I
changed the <xmlContent> element name to <contentXML> so it would
be compliant with the xml naming rules. I also renamed the complex type from
“xmlContentType” to “contentXMLType” to be consistent (and just in case there
are similar naming rules for types as well)
    


    


    I think that reflects all the schema changes I was tasked
with. I do have other action items which we can discuss on the call today (Mar 02)
    


    


    -hans
    


    


    -- 
    


    Hans Jespersen
    


    Principal Systems Engineer
    


    Solace Systems Inc.
    


    2051 Landings Drive, Mountain View, CA 94043
    


    Phone: (650) 924-2670
    


    hans.jespersen@solacesystems.com
    


    http://www.solacesystems.com


  • 4.  RE: [emergency-if] EDXL-DE 2.0 schema changes proposed at TCIP F2F meeting

    Posted 03-04-2010 18:34
      |   view attached



Related Content