NIST-ITL XML Working Group Meeting by ncz44837

VIEWS: 12 PAGES: 2

									                                        NIST-ITL XML Working Group Meeting
                                                  October 18, 2005

Attendees:
NIST contact:           Mike McCabe          mccabe@nist.gov                NIST
Ad-hoc group contact:   Gerry Coleman        coleman@doj.state.wi.us        WI Dept of Justice
Ad-hoc group members:   Ralph Lessmann       r.lessmann@shb-jena.com        Smith Heimann Biometrics
                        Dave Weston          david.weston@identix.com       Identix
                        David Woo            david.woo@doj.ca.gov           CA Dept of Justice
                        David Rodman         david.rodman@usdoj.gov         PEC
                        Bonny Scheier        winstats@pacbell.net           Saber
                        Cherie Morgan        cherie.d.morgan@lmco.com       BAE Systems Info Technology
                        Dale Hapeman         dale.hapeman@dodbfc.army.mil   Biometrics Fusion Center
                        Mike Garris          mgarris@nist.gov               NIST
                        Scott Hills          hills@aware.com                Aware
                        Catherine Plummer    catherine.plummer@search.org   SEARCH
                        Axel Goerlich        a.goerlich@shb-jena.com        Smith Heimann Biometrics
                        Patrice Yuh          PYuh@leo.gov                   FBI/CJIS
                        Dean Manson                                         FBI/CJIS
                        Darrell Boyce                                       NIEM
                        Linda Berone                                        NIEM

Agenda
To review the mappings and design examples put together by Gerry Coleman from the discussions from prior
meetings.

Discussions
    Basic Design concepts followed:
           o Using namespaces on all elements.
           o Include attributes for element ID and mnemonic that reference the existing specifications.
           o Keep a one-to-one correspondence between the existing specifications and the XML elements.
           o Provide a way to include GJXDM and CBEF.
           o The suffix ‘Code’ was added to elements that have a defined code set.
    The current design work is being done using ITL 2000. Will be updated whenever the next release
       (probably ITL 2006) is out.
    We need to decide on a namespace prefix. ‘nist’ was suggested. There were concerns that ‘n’ may be
       confused with other domains, such as NIEM.
    Type 2 Record design
           o Will recommend that the FBI define XML tags for their EFTS data to be embedded in the Type 2
              record.
           o A suggestion was made to add an attribute or element to define which user domain is embedded.
           o The question was raised whether there exists or should exist a registry of domains.
    Types 3,4,5,6
           o May want to discontinue the use of these record types. They are all binary. Type 14 is equivalent.
              May need to keep for legacy systems.
      Type 7 – User defined Image
           o Can embed GJXDM or other types.
    Type 8 – Signature Image
           o GJXDM is missing vector data. Will recommend that they and NIEM add it.
           o This record type is binary and does not include numeric field names. Will the fieldID and
               filedMnemonic attributes be optional for all?
    Type 9
           o Fingerprint minutiae needs added to GJXDM
           o We need a (vendor-specific) user-defined field block in type 9.
           o Vendor-specific elements have never been published. Should they be?
    Type 10 – Facial and Scars, Marks, Tattoos
           o GJXDM separates as 2 record types.
Action Items
    Take entire specifications and map to GJXDM. Make proposals to GJXDM to add missing elements to
       their model. (The mapping worksheet located on the NIEM website, www.niem.org, may be useful for
       doing this). Gerry will do this.
    Create an XML schema based on the design from the working group. Gerry will do this if no other
       participant volunteers.
    Meet again November 8 to review the work and discuss the presentation for the December conference.
    Decide on official namespace.

								
To top