Re: [earlywarning] Review of draft-rosen-atoca-cap

["Thomson, Martin" <[e-mail]>]

> > The results of a query on this service returns all applicable
> services for
> > the area.  Each contains a description.  The user chooses the warning
> > services based on these descriptions.
> >
> > There are costs, but it avoids the sticky taxonomy problem.
> 
> Interesting idea. Would be worthwhile to check how many different
> warning alert one would get with such an approach (in a specific
> geographical area).
 
Absolutely.  Scale is certainly a factor in all this.


> > Another approach is to allow for services to be identified with
> > proprietary URI identifiers.  These generic identifiers could be
> discovered using
> > out-of-band means (side of bus, web search).  Then LoST doesn't come
> into it
> > at all, SIP routing (possibly location-based) does all the hard work.
> It's
> > probably not-cool if we don't use LoST though.
> 
> Probably the right way is often somewhere in the middle. Currently the
> ITU-T tries to establish a registry of organizations distributing
> alerts. One can obviously retrieve the list of organizations from
> there. A user would not want to do that, however. Instead, they would
> more likely opt for two approaches: (a) use a preconfigured list of
> organizations, or (b) use an aggregator that does these types of things
> for them.

Sure.  The same types of mechanisms we use for discovering ...say entomology interest sites on the web could be used.  There might be well known aggregators or search sites, or it could be a system of referrals (each service might maintain a page that points to other similar services).

I'm just opening up the field a little.  I don't want to see a solution that is more technology/protocol heavy than it needs to be.

--Martin