Re: [emergency-have] Groups - Draft - HAVE Issues List(EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) uploaded

I agree that not all will, but most of them may...if we put the extension in both places you give folks the ability to categorize, but then again you add complexity! 

Don McGarry

The MITRE Corp.



(315) 838-2669 Office

(703) 595-9375 Cell

Sent via Blackberry

From: Lee Tincher <>

To: McGarry, Donald P.;  <>

Sent: Tue Jul 13 20:58:10 2010
Subject: RE: [emergency-have] Groups - Draft - HAVE Issues List (EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) uploaded

If the need for all extensions mapped to sub-categories -
which I don't think they do...

 

I was toying with the idea of adding one Parameter
element by extending it so it has an attribute named "category" and
give it a 0 to many cardinality:

 

 

      (1) Any system-specific
datum, in the form:

<parameter>

      <category>category</category>

<valueName>valueName</valueName>

<value>value</value>

</parameter>

where the content of
“valueName” is a

user-assigned string
designating the

domain of the code, the
category maps to 

a specific HAVE category or
subcategory

 and the content of “value”
is a string 

(which may represent a number)
denoting 

the value itself (e.g., valueName
="SAME" 

and value="CIV".)

(2) Values of
“valueName” that are

acronyms SHOULD be represented
in all

capital letters without periods
(e.g., SAME,

FIPS, ZIP). 

 

 

Those who cannot hear an angry shout may strain to hear a
whisper - Leonard Nimoy

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: McGarry, Donald P. [mailto:] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 8:31 PM

To: ''; ''

Subject: Re: [emergency-have] Groups - Draft - HAVE Issues List
(EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) uploaded

 

Yeah...I agree.  My thought was that we could add
the "extension" fields within the subcategories so at least they
would be tied to something tangible...

Don McGarry

The MITRE Corp.



(315) 838-2669 Office

(703) 595-9375 Cell

Sent via Blackberry

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Lee Tincher <>

To: McGarry, Donald P.;
 <>

Sent: Tue Jul 13 20:29:02 2010

Subject: RE: [emergency-have] Groups - Draft - HAVE
Issues List (EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) uploaded

 

It seems to be a common theme in all the areas where a
"list" is included in

the standard.  I suggested we place a
<Parameter> value (as defined in CAP)

in key areas to allow for some ad-hoc additions with the
thought that we

could expand each list with known attributes, but each
disaster/incident is

sure to turn up some special needs we haven't calculated.

 

There was some major concern that the stakeholders who
worked so hard to

come to a consensus on these lists may not like this at
all.  If you couple

that with the thought that "loosening" up the
standard that much may cause

confusion and may not even represent a concise standard -
well it all means

we need to think long and hard about this and reach out
as far as we can to

get some SME's to help us vet the ideas....

 

Please look at the Draft Meeting notes from today....

 

Thanks,

Lee

 

Those who cannot hear an angry shout may strain to hear a
whisper - Leonard

Nimoy

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: McGarry, Donald P. [mailto:] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 8:08 PM

To: '';
''

Subject: Re: [emergency-have] Groups - Draft - HAVE
Issues List

(EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) uploaded

 

Haha...well at least we are on the same page!  I
found this to be the case

with facilitystatus as well (no clear way to represent an
internal

disaster).  One other thing is representing services
that are not a capacity

type...I.e. this facility has CT, Trauma Services, STEMI,
Stroke team.  This

wouldn't give the status of that service, nor would it
give a capacity for

that service, just communicate the fact that the facility
"supports" or is

"certified" for it...

Don McGarry

The MITRE Corp.



(315) 838-2669 Office

(703) 595-9375 Cell

Sent via Blackberry

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Lee Tincher <>

To: McGarry, Donald P.;


<>

Sent: Tue Jul 13 19:37:41 2010

Subject: RE: [emergency-have] Groups - Draft - HAVE
Issues List

(EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) uploaded

 

This is hilarious!  We spent nearly the whole
meeting discussing this and

decided to table it until you could chime in....there are
some very

interesting issues around this and I look forward to
getting this problem

resolved...

 

All - I did not speak to Don about this at all before he
sent the email...

 

Thanks,

Lee 

 

Those who cannot hear an angry shout may strain to hear a
whisper - Leonard

Nimoy

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: McGarry, Donald P. [mailto:] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 5:55 PM

To: '';
''

Subject: Re: [emergency-have] Groups - Draft - HAVE
Issues List

(EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) uploaded

 

All-

Sorry I was unable to join today.  In fact I am
working on a field

deployment for HAVE as we speak.  In addition to the
structure of the

bedcapacity status being broken as already brought up I
have found that

there really needs to be extensibility added to the
servicecoveragestatus

section.  I think this jives with Lee's findings but
as I started to examine

some really key services (CT, STEMI Team, Stroke Team,
etc.) It is really a

shoehorn to stick these into just a single boolean for a
more generic

service like cardio or neuro.  I think to make this
work for now I'm going

to have to add a list of string bool pairs into the
standard to make this

work.  Any other thoughts?

Don McGarry

The MITRE Corp.



(315) 838-2669 Office

(703) 595-9375 Cell

Sent via Blackberry

 

----- Original Message -----

From: 
<>

To: 

<>

Sent: Tue Jul 13 16:50:15 2010

Subject: [emergency-have] Groups - Draft - HAVE Issues
List

(EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) uploaded

 

The document revision named Draft - HAVE Issues List

(EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls) has been submitted by Lee
Tincher to the EM

HAVE SC document repository.  This document is
revision #3 of

EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls.

 

Document Description:

List of issues to be considered from HAVE 1.0

 

View Document Details:

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=38630

 

Download Document:  

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/38630/EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList

_v1.0.xls

 

Revision:

This document is revision #3 of
EDXL_HAVE_IssuesList_v1.0.xls.  The

document details page referenced above will show the
complete revision

history.

 

 

PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for
you, your email application

may be breaking the link into two pieces.  You may
be able to copy and paste

the entire link address into the address field of your
web browser.

 

-OASIS Open Administration

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the
OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your
TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

 

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the
OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your
TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php