Re: Raising some points of concern

I'm new to this group, but we have considerable experience working  
with disaster management professionals.

Is there a currently proposed glossary anywhere?




Ed



Ed Dowding
ed@citysafe.org
+44 (0)7775 79 18 14
+44 (0)207 403 1665
Skype: eddowding

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Privileged or confidential information may be contained in this email
and is intended for the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or
the person responsible for delivering it to the person addressed, you
may not copy or deliver this to anyone else. If you receive this
email by mistake, please notify us immediately.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
76, The Maltings, Tower Bridge Road, London, SE1 3LJ
VAT 830424657 / Company no.4823119
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


On 23 Jun 2007, at 09:28, Don Cameron wrote:

>
> Hi all,
>
> As an early participant in this process and seemingly one of the  
> few actual
> domain representatives here, I feel it appropriate to support Gavins
> concerns. The reason I have not contributed lately is I am likewise
> disillusioned and feel this initiative has lost direction and focus -
> particularly with respect to the originally stated objectives/ 
> deliverables
> (repeated below for clarity).
>
> 1 - A current state-of-the-art of vocabularies used in the crisis/
> disaster/emergency/resilience sector.
> 2 - Towards an interoperability framework for the crisis/disaster/
> emergency/resilience sector
>
> It would appear the very well defined, accepted and adopted  
> vocabularies of
> our domain are now deemed insufficient for some members of this  
> group, who
> instead seemingly prefer to invent terms of reference - i.e. Why do  
> you wish
> to rename the globally accepted term "Disaster Management" to  
> something
> else? Also: "we need to review terms one by one, and adopt them as  
> proposed
> by existing resources, or amend them for w3 adoption" -and- "since the
> ontology is meant to enable a very different type of emergency  
> response than
> has been practiced previously". With all due respect, this group  
> has nowhere
> near the expertise, authority, or credibility to 'review or amend' the
> language of the disaster management domain or to advise on best  
> practice
> emergency response. Who here has managed a large scale disaster  
> response
> effort? It is unreasonable to expect the disaster management  
> community to
> accept recommendations unless we at least appear to acknowledge the
> expertise within the domain.
>
> My hope is ego's will be put aside and this process will produce  
> the stated
> deliverables - however I am not confident this will occur -  
> nonetheless
> offer support if we can manage to refocus efforts.
>
> Rgds, Don Cameron
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 20:59:40 UTC