emergency-if — archive
Groups - DE2.0DraftSchema_12_07_2010.zip (DE2.0DraftSchema_12_07_2010.zip) uploaded
I'm fine with it, as is.
Cheers,
Rex
On 12/13/10 7:40 AM, Timothy Grapes wrote:
Actually I am OK with leaving it at the current
level for a number of reasons. I submitted this as a
follow up from our SitRep F to F where this was identified
on the issues list and requested for submission to the DE
folks €“ so I followed through on the process.
SitRep team €“ we did discuss this and at least
one or more felt this was important. Please chime in.
Jeff, sorry I missed your call. Though this may
€œshorten € that call a bit I €™ll try you back shortlyJ.
Thanks,
Tim Grapes
Evotec
703-304-4829
From: McGarry,
Donald P. [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 3:46 PM
To: Timothy Grapes; [email protected];
[email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
'Rob Torchon'; 'Werner Joerg'; 'Lewis Leinenweber';
[email protected]
Subject: RE: DE SitRep requirement / request
Tim-
I €™ll chime in here. I think we need to keep
distribution type in the header section €¦
Here €™s why:
Conflicting distribution types can lead to
delivery problems and all though it €™s just an opinion, I
think distribution type is focused more on delivery versus
just content metadata. The way that I look at is that
related items should get packed in a single DE. If you have
a NEW report and an UPDATE report they aren €™t related per
se and should go in separate DE €™s. I think the way we
should address as you mentioned by saying you should send
separate DE €™s.
From: Timothy
Grapes [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:55 PM
To: [email protected];
[email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; McGarry, Donald P.;
[email protected]; 'Rob Torchon'; 'Werner Joerg';
'Lewis Leinenweber'; [email protected]
Subject: DE SitRep requirement / request
Importance: High
Hi Jeff,
Your update today reminded my about an issue we
ran into for SitReps. I thought one of our members had
submitted this into your process a while back, but
apparently not.
Given how late we are in the process, I would
request you add this to your issues list and evaluate both
the urgency and ease. If valid and easy perhaps it can be
accommodated. Otherwise it should live on a list for
another iteration.
€œThe EDXL-DE can only allow one distribution
type, which must be applied consistently across all content
objects if multiple content objects exist. With SitReps and
the high interest it is generating from state and local
regions, request that the distribution type element be moved
to the content object level. SitReps is constructed using 5
basic report types all hinged together by a common root
(e.g. €œField Observation €, €œcasualty and illness
summary € and €œResponse Resources €¦). However, one and
only one report type may be applied within any given SitRep
root (due to valid business rules that have been
agreed-upon). The DE provides the capability and meets our
requirement for €œmultiple SitReps in a single
€˜message €™ €, and is also the solution for sending of
multiple SitRep report types within one €œsend €. For
example, sending of a €œField Observation € report type
with a €œcasualty and illness summary € report type
requires 2 DE content objects. However, use cases exist
where one content object would require one distribution type
selection such as €œupdate €™, while the other would
require a different distribution type such as
€œreport €. €
The work around to not doing this in the DE 2.0,
is that a user must send one and only one SitRep Report type
per each DE (one content object), unless all of the content
objects / SitRep report types sent can ALL apply the same
distribution type such as €œupdate €.
Thanks for your consideration Jeff et al,
Tim Grapes
Evotec
703-304-4829
From:
[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 7:51 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [emergency-if] Groups -
DE2.0DraftSchema_12_07_2010.zip
(DE2.0DraftSchema_12_07_2010.zip) uploaded
The uploaded zip file contains
a proposed EDXL DE 2.0 Draft Schema
(Version: Dec 7, 2010) with HAVE Examples
----------------------------
Two examples are included using a HAVE report, first in a DE
wrapper and
second with DE descriptive content in a SOAP wrapper. A
third Sample.xml
file is also provided to show the DE 2.0 schema structure.
These examples
should validate and allow you to explore the draft schema.
This version of
the schema incorporates Jeff's original version with Don's
modifications as
of Dec 7, 2010.
Please review, test with your EDXL content, and provide
comments. Thanks
-- Jeff Waters
The document named DE2.0DraftSchema_12_07_2010.zip
(DE2.0DraftSchema_12_07_2010.zip) has been submitted by Jeff
Waters to the
EM Infrastructure Framework SC document repository.
Document Description:
EDXL DE 2.0 Draft Schema with HAVE Examples (Version: Dec 7,
2010)
----------------------------
(NOTE: Two examples are included using a HAVE report, first
in a DE wrapper
and second with DE descriptive content in a SOAP wrapper. A
third
Sample.xml file is also provided to show the DE 2.0 schema
structure. These
examples should validate and allow you to explore the draft
schema. This
version of the schema incorporates Jeff's original version
with Don's
modifications as of Dec 7, 2010)
Interesting changes in this schema from the original DE
schema include:
(1) the xlink standard is used to link content objects;
(2) a gml-compliant profile that includes circle, polygon,
etc. from geoRSS
is used for targetArea (until geo-oasis:Where is available);
(3) a reorganized schema is provided with more global
elements to enable
DE descriptive components (such as SenderRole,
ReceiverRole and
Keyword) to be used outside of the DE wrapper components so
that the
benefits of the DE can be used with other standard wrappers;
(4) the xsd choice structure is used to enable defaults for
ValueListURI
structures;
(5) a common types schema is provided along with a defaults
schema;
(6) an abstract class, IContent, is used, rather than xsd
choice, for
selecting xml content versus other content.
Please review, test with your EDXL content, and provide
comments. Thanks
View Document Details:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=40509
Download Document:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/40509/DE2.0DraftSchema_12_07_2010.zip
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
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3300 - Release Date:
12/06/10