Description
At the April 19th, 2012 meeting of the Reference Information Model subcommittee, the members discussed the following topics:
1. TOPIC: Should we organize the RIM reference model ontology by upper-level abstract concepts related to emergency management? (Answer: Perhaps. High-level concepts, like “Confidence”, might allow a user to search or browse through important emergency management concepts and see what EDXL standards implement that concept and how it is implemented in each.)
2. TOPIC: Should we extend the RIM ontology from a taxonomy of classes to defining properties of those classes? (Answer: Probably. The definition of classes based on properties would allow for consistency checking, i.e. automatic analysis of the ontology to determine if there are any classes whose definition can never be satisfied. )
3. TOPIC: What is the latest on the Tracking of Emergency Clients work? (Answer: The TEC work is moving forward with good progress, leveraging the related work done for Tracking of Emergency Patients (TEP), extending to other emergency clients. )
4. TOPIC: Should we update our schemas to use the new official W3C Xlink schema? (Answer: OGC is issuing a policy change to allow them to modify their schemas to adapt to the now official W3C Xlink schema and it seems like we should consider doing the same. Originally, the Xlnik specification was issues without an official schema and OGC and others made one up, but now for standardization, it's good to use the official version. (Jeff updated the draft DE 2.0 after this discussion to use the new Xlink schema.)
