Description:
Community list for discussing and developing the PFIF standard. See http://zesty.ca/pfif for details.
|
|
|
PFIF 1.4 draft: to be frozen June 5
|
| |
Hello,
Thank you everyone for your feedback on the draft PFIF 1.4
specification<[link]>
!
It appears to me that the major issues in PFIF 1.4 have now been resolved.
I therefore propose to freeze PFIF 1.4 in one week (June 5) so that
implementations can proceed. Please let me know if you have significant... more »
|
|
PFIF 1.4 (very) early draft
|
| |
Hi folks,
Just to get the ball rolling, I've incorporated some of the feature
requests for PFIF 1.4 into an early draft, available at:
[link]
The proposed changes from PFIF 1.4 are highlighted in the
"Changes<[link]>"
section.... more »
|
|
PFIF vs EDXL vs ?
|
| |
+pfif google group Great meeting last week guys! It seems to me that EDXL allows for other xml content embedded within it in the "embeddedXMLContent" tag, such that the missing person specific elements could be embedded within that object... basically using EDXL as a wrapper for most of the PFIF elements.... more »
|
|
PFIF 1.3 is finalized
|
| |
Hello everyone, I'm pleased to say that the PFIF 1.3 specification is now finalized. Thanks for everyone's contributions! [link] I'd like to encourage all implementations to move to PFIF 1.3 as soon as possible. If any questions or issues come up during implementation, please discuss them on this list. I'll keep the FAQ updated with common questions.... more »
|
|
feedback on PFIF 1.3
|
| |
Ka-Ping - Sorry for not being active in this process. I have been swamped. Here is some feedback. Good luck. Louiqa Raschid Louiqa Raschid Professor Robert H. Smith School of Business and Institute for Advanced Computer Studies and Center for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology and Department of Computer Science... more »
|
|
New draft of PFIF 1.3 specification, dated February 10
|
| |
Hello everyone, Thank you for your continued feedback on PFIF. A new draft of the PFIF 1.3 specification is now available here: [link] Please reply to the public PFIF list, pfif@googlegroups.com, with your thoughts and concerns. If you see no concerns with it, that feedback is... more »
|
|
PFIF 1.3 spec suggestion
|
| |
Hello Ping et al,
I attended the recent CrisisCommons call about missing persons and was
reviewing the specification you distributed. I thought of a couple of
possible changes that might be useful.
The note records are a very powerful means of adding annotation and
attaching additional info about the missing person. I like the... more »
|
|
Draft 1.3 specification is now available
|
| |
Hello everyone, Thank you for all your suggestions and feedback regarding improvements and changes to PFIF! A draft specification for PFIF 1.3 is now available here: [link] Please reply to this working group list with your thoughts and concerns. If you see no concerns with it, that feedback is useful too.... more »
|
|
Proposal: fixed field order
|
| |
PFIF 1.1 specified a fixed order for the fields in each record. PFIF 1.2 relaxed this, requiring certain fields to be first and then allowing the rest to be in any order. I am now feeling that this was a stupid mistake on my part, for two reasons: 1. The field order constraint in PFIF 1.2 cannot be expressed in XSD, so... more »
|
|
|