OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebxml-architecture message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Re: latest Version

I have been out of contact with the real world for two weeks so I have just
read the specification. Great work! Maybe the butcher's knife cut a little
bit deep sometimes, but if this could help it get through, I will be happy
to discuss any reintroduction in Tokyo.

Points to consider to get it out;

1. TechArch consensus. I understand that this was sent out late Friday,
which will give our members one working day to review and approve it. Also
it will be an implicit vote rather than explicit, i.e. a silence is an
approval. I would therefore suggest firstly that all active TA members send
in their positive support - you hereby have mine - to the list server and
not only comments (although these are naturally still welcome). Secondly I
would suggest that we send it for review by the QR team on Wednesday. This
may be stealing time we do not have but taking previous experience into
account, I do not wish this spec to be DOA due to procedures.
2. Comments received so far. We received a number of comments from Nikola
(previously known as Nicola). They include some labelled show-stoppers. Am I
to understand these as important issues for Tokyo or that we do not have
consensus? Also I have in my personal copy of the spec replaced section 16
with Scott's proposal.
3. Glossary. I am not sure about the status of this document nor which is
the latest draft. Until I do, I cannot circulate it to the SC or others.
4. Issues from conference call. Firstly, my apologies for my absence. I
understand that we have two urgent issues for me to bring up to SC - the
scope of conformance and naming convention. I am at it. In the meantime I
urge you not to stop the work in these areas. They are both important and if
they would be reallocated to another group later, the work is not wasted.


----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Eisenberg <BrianE@DataChannel.com>
To: <ebxml-architecture@lists.ebxml.org>
Cc: 'Klaus-Dieter Naujok ' <knaujok@pacbell.net>; 'Bruce Peat '
<bpeat@processsolutions.com>; 'Jeff Suttor ' <jeff.suttor@sun.com>; 'Duane
Nickull ' <duane@xmlglobal.com>; 'David Webber ' <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2000 8:06 AM
Subject: RE: latest Version

> To all ebXML TA folks:
> After a long week of nearly around the clock work, we have completely
> revised the Technical Architecture specification. We worked through all of
> the comments from the Quality Review team and have completely reworked the
> ENTIRE TA spec. Aside from the Messaging Services section, this version
> (0.8.72i) is essentially a new architecture document. That said, given the
> extent of change from the previous version, no change log is included.
> Here is the plan of action:
> 1. Please review the specification (TA team only) over the weekend. Please
> post all comments to the TA discussion list. Please focus on the content
> the document, not the grammar and formatting.
> 2. Barring any show-stopping issues, our plan is to do a final revision on
> Monday before submitting it to the Quality Review team (by end of day
> Monday).
> 3. If approved by the Quality Review team (5 days after submitting we
> hear back from them), we will post to the entire ebXML community for a
> comment and review period.
> 4. After collecting comments from the review period leading up to Tokyo,
> (the TA team) will devote most of the Tokyo meeting incorporating
> and also having our liaisons work with each of the project teams to get
> feedback on each of the respective major sections in the TA spec.
> 5. Drink lots of sake :-)
> Before reviewing the specification, please keep the following in mind:
> 1. The glossary needs to be harmonized with this latest spec. This means
> that the "bold italic" convention for glossary terms has NOT yet been
> applied to this version of the TA spec. This task will be completed before
> submission to the Quality Review team.
> 2. If your name is not on the list of participants, please email me at:
> briane@datachannel.com with your name and company info. We did our best to
> include everyone, but may have inadvertently overlooked a few TA team
> participants. Please accept our apologies if we did so.
> The specification is attached as a zipped Word doc named:
> ebXML_TA_v0.8.72i.zip (620 K). If anyone has problems opening the .ZIP
> archive, please send email to briane@datachannel.com and I will directly
> email you a copy of the word file (1.9 MB).
> I'd like to personally thank the following people for their hard work
> the past week: Klaus-Dieter Naujok, David RR Webber, Duane Nickull, Jeff
> Sutor, Chris Ferris, Karsten Riemer, and Bruce Peat.
> Best Regards,
> --Brian
> Brian Eisenberg
> Standards & Technology Liaison
> DataChannel, Inc.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

Powered by eList eXpress LLC