Moving Targets can be difficult to keep up with,
and I have to admit that I have been slack in
keeping up with the specifics of the DRM that I
will be increasingly involved with, and I now
realize that I have to remedy that since my next
focus area is going to be healthcare informatics
in detail, and especially as they interrelate
to/with emergency management in general and the
Emergency Data Exchange Language components the
OASIS EM TC is working on in particular. (01)
Since the subcommittee I co-chair specifically
deals with EDXL in large part, and we are taking
up the Resource Messaging component, this brings
up a set of critical concerns for data exchange
packages and what the specific distinctions are
between data description metadata and data
context metadata in the DRM, especially since I
will be building registries for both, and some
associated repositories, too, in order to have
the (hopefully) ontologically organized resources
(standards, standards organizations and companies
that use those standards along with the metadata
for how those companies use those standards and
how those standards might, could, or should be
mapped to other standards or that stand in some
particular relationship to other standards, such
as HL7, LOINC, SNOMED the Foundational Model of
Anatomy, etc). (02)
Ensuring that the data exchange packages for
these standards work as well as they can at the
outset of DRM adoption is crucial for setting the
stage to start drastically reducing healthcare
costs and healthcare financing costs, so I wanted
to give y'all a heads up that I will probably be
asking a lot of questions, with, perhaps, a great
deal of specificity, but better I do the asking
now than we find out later that a whole whopping
huge set of inescapable data doesn't fit. Also, I
need to identify the areas where the healthcare
informatics community, such as it is at this
point in time, is made aware of any avoidable
difficulties. Getting liaison efforts going now
will also smoothe the path to better
interoperability down the road, especially since
we now have the newly launched Center for
Ontological Research and the Center for
Biomedical Ontology through which such work can
hopefully be facilitated. (03)
Ciao,
Rex (04)
At 9:58 AM -0500 11/19/05, Brand Niemann wrote:
>FYI, and for your comments.
>
>Brand
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Brand Niemann" <bniemann@xxxxxxx>
>To: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@xxxxxxx>; "DRM comment reconciliation
>team" <red-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 5:38 PM
>Subject: Re: [red-team] O Fw: [CIOCD] Draft OMB
>InformationDisseminationPolicy for Agency Comment
>
>
>> Joe, Excellent response and so maybe this mapping should appear somewhere
>in
>> DRM 2.0, etc. and this relates to my earlier comment about mapping
>metadata
>> terms to the three Abstract Model functions. Brand
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@xxxxxxx>
>> To: "Brand Niemann" <bniemann@xxxxxxx>; "DRM comment reconciliation team"
>> <red-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 2:20 PM
>> Subject: RE: [red-team] O Fw: [CIOCD] Draft OMB Information
>> DisseminationPolicy for Agency Comment
>>
>>
>> Thanks Brand - sorry for the inconvenience re: my misundertanding.
>> Regarding your question below:
>>
>> > The guidance talks about developing formal information models
>> > and list many different types in footnote 14, which is
>> > consistent with our SICoP - ONTAC Work Plan to inventory and
>> > assess what the Europeans call Semantic Interoperability
>> > Assets, but is the DRM Abstract Model just one of those
>> > "information models" or does it provide a framework for
>> > harmonizing, implementing, interoperating, etc. with all of
> > > those "information models"?
>>
>> I would say it is the second case. That is, the DRM Abstract Model would
>> not be one of those "information models"; rather, the DRM Abstract Model
>> provides a framework for harmonizing, implementing, interoperating, etc.
>> with all of those "information models".
>>
>> Additional thoughts on the pertinent part of footnote 14, which states
>> "Formal information models include but are not limited to data models,
>> data dictionaries, thesauri, taxonomies, topic maps, ontologies,
>> controlled vocabularies, and exchange packages.": As we know, we can
>> easily "associate" (meaning in our minds, at a minimum) each of these
>> examples of formal information models with one of the DRM
>> standardization areas ("->" means "is associated with):
>>
>> Data models -> Data Description
>> Data dictionaries -> Data Description
>> Thesauri -> Data Context
>> Taxonomies -> Data Context
>> Topic maps -> Data Context
>> Ontologies -> Data Context
>> Controlled vocabularies -> Data Context
>> Exchange packages -> Data Sharing
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Joe
>>
>> Joseph Chiusano
>> Associate
>> Booz Allen Hamilton
>>
>> 700 13th St. NW
>> Suite 1100
>> Washington, DC 20005
>> O: 202-508-6514
>> C: 202-251-0731
>> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Brand Niemann [mailto:bniemann@xxxxxxx]
>> > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 2:00 PM
>> > To: Chiusano Joseph; DRM comment reconciliation team
> > > Subject: Re: [red-team] O Fw: [CIOCD] Draft OMB Information
>> > DisseminationPolicy for Agency Comment
>> >
>> > Joe, I am citing the OMB Draft 207d guidance that Mary
>> > distributed to the drm team on 11/15, not the DRM 2.0
>> > document itself. Brand
>> >
>> > P.S. Please see the attached.
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@xxxxxxx>
>> > To: "Brand Niemann" <bniemann@xxxxxxx>; "DRM comment
>> > reconciliation team"
>> > <red-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 10:53 AM
>> > Subject: RE: [red-team] O Fw: [CIOCD] Draft OMB Information
>> > DisseminationPolicy for Agency Comment
>> >
>> >
>> > Brand,
>> >
>> > So sorry to not understand here: Can you please describe more
>> > specifically the "formal information models" you reference?
>> > We are doing
>> > additional formatting on the document now, and some of the
>> > page numbers
>> > may be off by a bit. I looked where you indicated, and did not see
>> > anything that matched your description.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Joe
>> >
>> > Joseph Chiusano
>> > Associate
>> > Booz Allen Hamilton
>> >
>> > 700 13th St. NW
>> > Suite 1100
>> > Washington, DC 20005
>> > O: 202-508-6514
>> > C: 202-251-0731
>> > Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
>> >
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: red-team-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > [mailto:red-team-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Brand Niemann
>> > > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 10:34 AM
>> > > To: DRM comment reconciliation team
>> > > Subject: Re: [red-team] O Fw: [CIOCD] Draft OMB Information
>> > > DisseminationPolicy for Agency Comment
>> > >
>> > > Mary and All, Owen and I discussed this at the XML 2005
>> > > Conference and both felt it was good guidance.
>> > >
>> > > I would ask especially with respect to preparation for the
>> > > upcoming DRM Abstract Model Workshop that Bryan invited me to
>> > > participate in, what is the relationship between the formal
>> > > information models mentioned in paragraph 2 on page 3, and
>> > > especially footnote 14, and the role/use of the DRM Abstract Model?
>> > >
>> > > The guidance talks about developing formal information models
>> > > and list many different types in footnote 14, which is
>> > > consistent with our SICoP - ONTAC Work Plan to inventory and
>> > > assess what the Europeans call Semantic Interoperability
>> > > Assets, but is the DRM Abstract Model just one of those
>> > > "information models" or does it provide a framework for
>> > > harmonizing, implementing, interoperating, etc. with all of
>> > > those "information models"?
>> > >
>> > > Brand
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: <Mccaffery.Mary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > To: <red-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 7:45 PM
>> > > Subject: [red-team] O Fw: [CIOCD] Draft OMB Information
>> > > Dissemination Policy for Agency Comment
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > All,
>> > > >
>> > > > OMB has issued their 207 D policy out for comment to
>> > > the Agencies.
>> > > > It does rely on the DRM. I am going to send this out to
>> > > the entire drm
>> > > > team to give them a heads up.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Mary E McCaffery
>> > > > Senior Advisor
>> > > > Assistant Administrator
>> > > > Office of Environmental Information
>> > > > U.S.EPA
>> > > >
>> > > > 202-564-2704
>> > > > ----- Forwarded by Mary McCaffery/DC/USEPA/US on
>> > 11/15/2005 07:41 PM
>> > > > -----
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > "Schlarman, Glenn R."
>> > > > <Glenn_R._Schlarman@O To:
>> > > CIO-DEPTCIO@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > MB.EOP.GOV> cc:
>> > >
>> > > > Sent by: CIOs and
>> > > Subject: [CIOCD] Draft
>> > > OMB Information Dissemination Policy for Agency Comment
>> > > > Deputy CIOs
>> > > > <CIO-DEPTCIO@listserv
>> > > > .gsa.gov>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > 11/15/2005 04:23 PM
>> > > > Please respond to
>> > > > "Schlarman, Glenn R."
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
> > > > > Hello everyone,
>> > > >
>> > > > Attached for comment by Wednesday, November 23 is a draft
>> > of policy
>> > > > required by section 207d of the E-Government Act. The
>> > > draft addresses
>> > > > promoting greater public access to government
>> > information, improving
>> > > > information resource management, and use of the FEA data
>> > > reference model
>> > > > (which as you know is also currently out for your comment).
>> > > >
>> > > > Please provide your comments to Dan Costello at
>> > > Dcostell@xxxxxxxxxxx,
>> > > > Kimberly Nelson knelson@xxxxxxxxxxx, and me at
>> > gschlarm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > (Yes, we will be working the Wednesday before and the Friday after
>> > > > Thanksgiving.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thank You
>> > > > Glenn
>> > > > (See attached file: 207d Draft Policy.pdf)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > --------------
>> > > ----
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > _________________________________________________________________
>> > > > Message Archives: http://cosine.cim3.net/forum/red-team/
>> > > > Shared Files: http://cosine.cim3.net/file/work/DRM/drm_redteam/
>> > > > Community Portal: http://cosine.cim3.net/
>> > > > To Post: mailto:red-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > Community Wiki: http://cosine.cim3.net/wiki/
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > _________________________________________________________________
>> > > Message Archives: http://cosine.cim3.net/forum/red-team/
>> > > Shared Files: http://cosine.cim3.net/file/work/DRM/drm_redteam/
>> > > Community Portal: http://cosine.cim3.net/
>> > > To Post: mailto:red-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > Community Wiki: http://cosine.cim3.net/wiki/
>> > >
>> >
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://cosine.cim3.net/forum/red-team/
>> Shared Files: http://cosine.cim3.net/file/work/DRM/drm_redteam/
>> Community Portal: http://cosine.cim3.net/
>> To Post: mailto:red-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Wiki: http://cosine.cim3.net/wiki/
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:207d Draft
>Policy.pdf (PDF /«IC») (000B8BC5)
>_________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (05)
--
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-849-2309
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (06)
|