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: TA Specification Review

Title: RE: TA Specification Review

I have to agree with Duane and others on this one. If we continue to scrutinize each and every section before submitting the document to the Quality Review team, then we will never finish before Vancouver, thus delaying the plenary vote, and also potentially delay to overall debut of the ebXML Standards in Vienna. Bob Cunningham shares this sentiment and expressed a need for the TA Team to draw the line and formally vote to freeze the document for Quality Review. After the document is approved by QR, we most certainly will review and incorporate the comments from within the ebXML community. We are at a critical point right now and MUST submit the document to the QR team for review. This does not diminish the continued constructive comments, but rather allows the document in its current version to be reviewed by the masses.



-----Original Message-----
From: duane [mailto:duane@xmlglobal.com]
Sent: Monday, December 25, 2000 5:53 AM
To: Brian Eisenberg
Cc: 'agrangard@nycall.com'; Raman, Dick; tmcgrath@tedis.com.au; ebXML
SC, List server; ebXML-Architecture List
Subject: Re: TA Specification Review


Forst of all - Merry Christmas.  I am in Germany until Jan 5 so I may
not be able to respond immediately.

As for the current spec, the exact thing that I did not want to happen
has happened.  People are submitting fixes, comments etc BEFORE it has
gone out for comment.  Here is what has to happen:

1. Vote by TA committee to send it out to QRT AS IS
2. QRT PT to okay document for submission to the Plenary for general

NOTE:  Items 1 and 2 are done with an explicit view that the document is
NOT in its' final form.  We are putting it out for comments.  THe BP
section will have others commenting on it besides just a few in the BP
team.  As for the other comments, they are useful but we have a
responsibility to collect a wider range of comments.

I am not saying any of the input is not good, just that we have a
process to follow.

3.  The comments period

This is where we want corrections on spelling, grammar, wording etc.
Doing it now will just delay the specification unnecessarily.

TA Team - lets' vote on this spec AS IS.  IF there is something that
needs to be changed - it can be changed during the comment period. 

*Please* lets get this spec done.

Duane NIckull

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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC