RE: ebXML: TA doc, sect 10, RegRep, redone as more of an Arch doc

[Jeff Suttor <Jeff.Suttor@eng.sun.com>]

>What does the project team think?

From: David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>

>The solution is NOT to gut the entire thing so that virtually nothing
>of substance or value is being communicated ...

Agreed.  What was gutted was the non-architectural content.
As I said, "it needs more fleshing out with new content to be complete"

>... lots of good substance that should go into the Architecture 
>document - including the latest work that has come out of 
>OASIS in the last few weeks.

Is there a pointer for the OASIS work?

>Notice in an architecture document diagrams are KEY and 
>VITAL pieces for people to conceptualize from.
>
>So - my Grinch filter failed on your draft - because it had NO diagrams
>in it!!!

Agreed, pictures are essential to communicating architectural ideas.
I was planning to add pictures and flesh out the document if people responded 
positively to the idea of reworking the current document into an architectural 
document.

>Anyway - I believe that the input to TA has been done once from
>RegRep - we need to review that - Lisa Carnahan covered this
>for us in San Jose - so I would like to see a review with Lisa as
>team lead (if Lisa can spare us the time at least as reviewer)
>and then put some coordinated effort into this.

How about it Lisa?

>Jeff - your stuff came too far out of left field, Duanes was out of
>right field - we need something in the middle!

I'll read this as a positive expression that we should do something. :)

I am concerned that there might be a perception that all the current document 
needs is a few minor edits.  I think that we need a deep reworking of the 
document to turn it into a real TA doc.

>Trying not to be too grinchy here.

Thanks!
All of us in Whoville are ready to go.  :)


--
Jeff.Suttor@Sun.com      http://sun.com/xml
XML Technology Center    http://web.eng/xml