ebxml-architecture message

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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

Subject: Re: CC minutes


the snippet should probably come from Nikola's draft
recommendation, not my rambling.

As for which section, since I cannot read the TOC
(no Word for Solaris last time I checked;-) I'll
leave that decision up to you folk.

If I recall earlier versions, wasn't there a conventions
section or something to that effect?

I would not place it in the compliance section, that's
something completely different.



> Brian Eisenberg wrote:
> I absolutely agree with Chris, and propose that I insert his wording into the TA spec (which I'm
> putting the finishing touches on this morning. I'll have it out to the group by the end of the day
> (Seattle time).
> Chris - any suggestion on what section of the document would be the best place to insert this
> snippet?
> Please find the attached TOC for the latest TA spec.
> --Brian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@east.sun.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 9:35 AM
> To: agrangard@nycall.com
> Cc: ebxml-architecture@lists.ebxml.org
> Subject: Re: CC minutes
> Anders/team,
> With regards to:
> "Nicola reported that only one response had been received on his email on the subject, which
> should
> be called Capitalisation rather than naming convention to avoid confusion with the work being
> performed by the Core Components team on the semantic aspects.
> It was agreed that this should remain a task for the Technical Architecture but close cooperation
> with the other teams is needed."
> Why does this never seem to get resolved and finalized? There has been some
> discussion around this for as long as I can recall. We (TR&P and TP teams)
> need to have the issue resolved once and for all.
> I am in favor of the proposal (UpperCamelCase for Elements, lowerCamelCase
> for attributes), but without clear guidance, we're likely to end up with
> a bunch of DTD or XSD schemas which have differing capitalization schemes
> which is (IMHO) unprofessional and would reflect poorly.
> PLEASE make a CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS decision on this matter and do so
> quickly. We are trying to finalize these various DTD/XSD schemas that the
> infrastructure components define/require.
> Thanks,
> Chris
> "agrangard@nycall.com" wrote:
> >
> > Please find attached the minutes from yesterday's TA conference call.
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Anders Grangard
> > Edifrance
> > Ingénieur - Consultant en Commerce électronique
> > Tel: +33 (0)1 42 91 62 24
> > http://www.edifrance.org
> >
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >                        Name: TA_CC_141200.doc
> >    TA_CC_141200.doc    Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword)
> >                    Encoding: BASE64
>                  Name: TA TOC.doc
>    TA TOC.doc    Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword)
>              Encoding: base64
org:Sun Microsystems, Inc;XTC Advanced Development
title:Sr. Staff Engineer
fn:Christopher Ferris

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

Powered by eList eXpress LLC