Description
At the September 22nd, 2011 meeting of the Reference Information Model (RIM) subcommittee, the members discussed the following topics:
1. TOPIC: Should elements such as “certainty”, “severity”, “urgency”, “confidence”, “priority” be elements in common types? (Answer: Probably, because they are important meta-components of any standard and our definition of them can help guide standardized-usage in current and future specifications. The RIM perspective is how to make the suggested common elements as reusable as possible across the standards. The DE 2.0 draft now includes certainty, severity and urgency. SitRep includes confidence for reports. But at this point, they are not in the common types. Issues: What is the threshold for deciding what goes into common types and what level of scrutiny is required? Should flexibility be provided for localized definitions of values (with defaults) or require a fixed set of values? )
2. TOPIC: Should we recommend that we follow the OASIS recommendation for handling checksums to ensure downloaded files are correct? (Answer: Yes. Martena Gooch recommended that we consider this important issue. Although various suggestions have been made, it appears there is an OASIS staff recommendation for how to handle this. We will follow up with an email in response to Robin Cover and see if we can get a clarification on the OASIS process for doing the checksum and how soon it will be implemented. Then we can inform the EM TC membership and suggest that we utilize the process. Issue: Can the checksum be used for component parts of a zip as well as the entire zip?)
3. TOPIC: Should we use a class-based approach to representing EDXL elements in an ontology-based reference information model? (Answer: Yes, this provides better support for reasoning. Rex is proceeding to extend his ValueList Ontology and we will compare to Jeff's version so that we can come up with a recommended approach to the ontology modeling.)
