|
Forwarded conversation Subject: Fwd: FiremansDigitalKeybox ------------------------ From: David Holmberg <david.holmberg@xxxxxxxx>
Alan, Jason,
Here is Deborah's take on the scenario progression. It looks good, except I don't understand all the slides.
Deborah, some clarification please? Thanks! David I've shared a document with you called "FiremansDigitalKeybox":
David Holmberg ---------- From: Deborah MacPherson <debmacp@xxxxxxxxx> This is the CSA following procedure attempting to contact the building personnel to verify the alert - the alert is attached or related to the contact attempt from "...CSA representative then immediately transmits these two alerts to 9-1-1 dispatch electronically, with both CAP alerts grouped together in a message...." Both alerts are grouped together as joined arrows, the multiple copies are to represent electronic transmission as opposed to being passed, which is a curved arrow, an alert which is a short arrow, or the Computer Aided Dispatch Software Interface transmitting building alert data shown by the concentric circles.
PS I think CAD is a confusing acronym and prefer Dispatch Software Interface if possible. Its hard to understand what might or should be coming from a BIM, let alone if there was legacy information in CAD systems
17 is the whole cycle of the alerts moving through the appropriate servers and services.
18 is 9-1-1 dispatch center receives the CAP alerts with data fields from the message loaded into form fields in the CADSI. I assume some of these data fields are populated by the local jurisdiction. The underlying OGC graphic is actually all falling in the right place for this.
I've been building a set of relationships between OmniClass (used for BIM and open exchange) to UniFormat (used for pricing and simple views) to MasterFormat2004 (used for construction). Then relating standards and forms to capture and direct exchange patterns across areas where those classifications, formats, and standards are used. A large overview is here .
Does that make more sense now? Thanks - Deborah
---------- From: Alan Vinh <alan.vinh@xxxxxxxx>
Hi Deborah,
Thanks for taking the time to put together your ppt document. For slide 16, etc., I'm not clear what you're trying to distinguished between "passing" and "transmitting" the alerts between these systems. What we are trying to work towards is some form of standard access point (SAP) between the various emergency computing facilities/networks such as the BBS, the CSA, the NG9-1-1 and the PSAP systems. Having the SAP in place and mostlikely it will be implemented as a web services interface, we don't really "transmit" alerts (ala radio signals) but rather connect to the various SAPs and send in the alerts via IP connections/communications (either via land lines or mobile communication). For slide 23, you have the PSAP sending/transmitting info/alerts; they do use radio communication with the first responders but the alerts (CAP msgs, etc.) will still be sent via IP connections, and connecting back to the BBS/building is also done via IP connections. All IP connections and communications between the various SAP and their respective computing facilities will be encrypted. I think EDXL (use for routing?) is useful within the NG9-1-1 system where they need to route the alerts to the proper PSAP, or it can be used at some central CSA SAP so that the alerts can be sent to the proper CSA company, I'm not sure where else we would need to use EDXL. As for the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) acronym, this acronym is well known to the first responder community so we should try to stick with their acronyms whenever possible. IJIS (http://www.ijis.org) represents over 250 CAD vendors and they had a representative (Scott Parker) at our workshop. Various jurisdictions use many different types of CAD systems, hence we don't want to go inside the PSAP, but rather we would like to define how to send alerts (via the SAP) into the PSAP meaning that the PSAP has to support a SAP for their computing facility. Once the alerts are inside the PSAP, they can convert the CAP messages into whatever they want to feed their CAD systems, this is where the OGC graphic might come into play. From the PSAP or from the mobile first responder units, connecting back to the BBS is again done via a standardized IP connection, hopefully it will also be in some form of the SAP too. Regards - Alan ---------- From: Deborah MacPherson <debmacp@xxxxxxxxx> Hi Alan, David, Jason Slide 16 - distinguished between "passing" and "transmitting", my initial thought is perhaps this only a terminology problem because I was literally following your words to establish a +/- visual vocabulary to see what is happening in each step. However, it is getting complicated to understand how the messages are physically sent or received via IP connections in terms of access procedures more than the access points or placement in the sequence shown. In other words, it seems SAP Standard Access Points would have performance requirements to allow or not allow sending and receiving based on xyz factors which at some point may be exactly what the finer points of distinction are between "passing" vs "transmitting". It seems like passing would have some built-in pre-permissions and transmitting gets picked up by someone who is looking for this kind of information. If that is getting too detailed though and the SAP itself is more important, the symbols should be changed to be the same.
Slide 23 - I'm still trying to understand what you are saying. In general the objective is to have this sequence of arrows and boxes and data field representations to use as a background - just like the OGC graphic is the background for this - to see where open standards apply. EX: where do you use EDXL? Where does NBIMS come in? Which standards have, essentially jurisdiction, over which step like doctors do in hospitals when the patient is formally handed over from one to the next?
In regards to CAD, the main audience would already know and that is fine, probably a disambiguation ala wikipedia would help to clarify for people coming from the building modeling side. We'd like to invite you all to join a conference call about Connecting Building Information with EDXL
Friday 3 to 5 EST. This are important issues to get right from the beginning of this head on collision between disciplines. ---------- From: Alan Vinh <alan.vinh@xxxxxxxx>
Hi Deborah,
In the context of what we had discussed at our workshop, "passing" would be the valid word to use since we are doing strict/secured communication between the various computing facilities (passing alerts via the SAP). We are not envisioning sending out broadcasts (ala EDXL?) with all parties listening and certain parties responding (hence I don't quite understand the circles on slide 23). It is computer-to-computer communication between computing facilities/networks via web services architecture (i.e., via the SAP). One of the research areas is to define the appropriate SAP and its related security with authentication/authorization/security tokens, etc. We have a list of leaders that are assigned to lead key research areas (with industry) to define and resolve issues in order to realize the communication between buildings and the various public safety computing facilities. I'm not sure how to answer your question about which standards have jurisdiction over which step of the communication path (please see enclosed picture). I believe the NG9-1-1 is using EDXL to route their alerts, perhaps the CSA folks can use EDXL to route the incoming alerts to the appropriate CSA company depending on the initiating address of the alert. NBIMS would play its role in defining building related entities such as floor plans, alert location, etc., i.e., the lower right corner of the attached document. It is probably easier to follow our scenario example if you overlay it on the attached document, then perhaps you can map those thoughts onto your slides? I will be in on Friday if you wish to call me to discuss our scenario pertaining to the attached document - it might be clearer for both of us. I'm not sure about the 3pm conference call yet, it's a good possibility that I can join. You can also give me your number and I will call your around 11am on Friday if that will work for you. Regards - Alan ---------- From: Deborah MacPherson <debmacp@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks Alan. Just as an explanation of why the heck would I even want to understand these things enough to use the right words or create an acceptable representation - I am a specifications writer at an architects office. A purist for A201, a contract document by the AIA American Institute of Architects standard for general conditions that has only 3 entities: Owner, Architect, Contractor. Engineers who will design systems to comply with the great wide open are consultants to the Architect, we have to be able to understand, especially in the hands of specification writers because we number and classify. A simple understanding of the overall cycles, standards, and requirements that may be expected of the building data has to come together in the Architects office, because that group of brains is the pin holding everything together when a building and its information are born.
I'm just trying to make a representation that specification writers, open standards people, and literally contractors building the buildings to meet a contract - are able to understand. This same simple thing could probably work for the standard building plans you are seeking.
Happy Thanksgiving - and on Friday morning I need to go with my husband to do some things and am actually going to be racing back to make the 3 call. Deborah
PS also yes of course will try the other picture as a background - next week with feedback and direction from the call. -- ******************************************************** Deborah L. MacPherson CSI CCS, AIA Projects Director, Accuracy&Aesthetics Specifications and Research, WDG Architecture ********************************************************
_________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/bsp-forum/ Subscribe: mailto:bsp-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/bsp-forum/ Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/BSP/ Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?BuildingServicePerformance (01) |
