[EAS] [BC] The words we use

[Ed Czarnecki]

Nah ... Richard merely raised a point that was worth digging a bit deeper
into - it's not CAP (aka cargo pants) that is the cause of any significant
issues ... the underlying Part 11 EAS regulations have some defects - and
these regulatory ambiguities are what still leads to implementation issues,
not CAP. 

So, no nerve touched at all - the tone was just probably the result of
trying to use speech-to-text, on a smartphone, at a hockey rink.  

From: EAS [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Botterell,
Arthur at CalOES

Ed, it sounds as if someone touched a nerve.  Quite unnecessary to defend
the work of the ECIG in my view; given that we had zero flexibility in the
SAME schema, there really was no alternative to having both the IPAWS
Profile to specify what CAP pockets would correspond to SAME pockets, and
the ECIG recommendations to ensure consistency in the presentation of SAME.
The latter was perhaps not as ambitious as the aforementioned "Common Look &
Feel" specs, but the underlying need to present alerts in a predictable and
consistent way was the same.  

I prize it as one of the major accomplishments of CAP that we were able to
take such a large step forward on a global scale without leaving EAS and NWR
behind.

Had it been possible to reengineer EAS and NWR at the same time as the CAP
relay network was being designed we might have had fewer problems with
fitting round pegs into square... um... pockets.  But that wasn't an option,
although we're starting to make a bit of progress as broadcasting becomes
increasingly digital.  Perhaps as more of the analog broadcast
infrastructure is depreciated and replaced it will be possible to revisit
Part 11 in a strategic way rather than as an accumulating patchwork of
fixes.

Then again, given many ownerships' sense of entitlement to their licenses,
it may prove infeasible to rely on broadcasters as a key part of our warning
infrastructure.  That will, indeed, be the end of an era, but not, I think,
the end of the world.

Art
________________________________________
From: EAS <eas-bounces at radiolists.net> on behalf of Ed Czarnecki
<ed.czarnecki at monroe-electronics.com>

No flames or bombs coming from over here.  But this whole talk of cargo
pants, etc is *soooooo* 1990s (from a fashion perspective).

The EAS vendors really didn't touch the cargo pants per se.  We came to a
fairly collegial discussion about which pockets in the pants needed to be
used to comply with the Part 11 rules, and that fostered some decent level
of interoperability across vendors and implementations.

So actually, there are fairly few differences among vendors in terms of how
to utilize the CAP cargo pants.  From this perspective, we're all wearing
cargo pants the same way, and reaching into the same pockets.  That in and
of self is a modest success IMHO.

Differences among gas vendors stem from more fundamental ambiguities within
part 11.  So any problems with the "cargo pants" really stem from
ill-defined requirements within part 11, not CAP itself.  Think about it ...
all the issues about the definition of immediacy, usage of time, etc... are
all within part 11, not CAP - and in part due to bilateral discussions
between government and some of the vendors - we're different manufacturers.
Somewhat different opinions at different points of time, and some
manufacturers did not even get the benefit of an opinion while others did.

There is an expression about trying to put a saddle on a cow (not to quote
Stalin too much).  In a lot of ways that's how retrofitting CAP to fit Part
11 is like.  Or maybe part 11 is the out-of-style style bell bottom jeans,
if CAP the questionably fashionable elasrltic cargo pants.  We're trying to
take something with a lot of pockets and utility (CAP), and retrofitted back
to something with almost no pockets and zero flexibility (FSK EAS).

Still, when all the cargo pants are gone, it's good feeling to know that the
bell bottom jeans are still there in the back of the drawer.

Have we beaten the analogy to death yet?

Edward Czarnecki, Ph.D.
Senior Director - Strategic and Government Affairs Monroe Electronics Inc. /
Digital Alert Systems

ed.czarnecki at monroe-electronics.com
585-765-2254 | fax 585-765-9330
Reston VA | Lyndonville NY

__________________________________________________________
The EAS Forum Discussion List is hosted by the BWWG (Broadcast Warning
Working Group). http://eas.radiolists.net Please invite your friends to join
our Forum! The sign up is at:
http://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/eas
___________________________________________________________