Re: Final Review Instructions

[Karsten Riemer <Karsten.Riemer@east.sun.com>]

Tim, Duane, Brian,

I had two showstopper issues. And I think I still do.

One was "accepted", but not satisfactorily addressed, see attached e-mail.

If this one is fixed as I suggest in the e-mail, then I think the other one
goes away in terms of the document text itself. 

(so then both my showstoppers would have been addressed as far as the document
text is concerned)

But the second one remains an issue in terms of ebXML direction and
architecture. In the resolution, the TA team said: "We are defining the ebXML
reference architecture as adopted from the Open-EDI ISO spec". Who is "we" in
that sentence? Has anyone on the TA team read the Open-EDI ISO spec? Where
else has this spec been referred to? If it truely is the reference
architecture basis for ebXML, then how come nobody at ebXML knows about it? 

I will vote "no" to any TA document that in any way refers to the Open-EDI ISO
spec as a reference architecture or reference model for ebXML. If UMM wants to
have it as their reference model, that is fine, and outside of the scope of
ebXML.

-karsten


>This is to advise the TA Team and its Editors that the Quality Review Team
>have scheduled a meeting on Wednesday 7th Feb to review the TA Specification
>change log.
>
>Because someone decided to hold this plenary at the far end of the earth,(
>;-} ) the QR Team will not be able to accept your document after Monday 5th
>and review it before the Vancouver plenary.
>
>Duane Nickull wrote:
>
>>
>> We wish to present this document to the Quality Regiew Team on Monday
>> along with the extensive log of changes and comment disposition.  It is
>> our hope that they will expediate a review and release to the plenary
>> for a final vote in Vancouver.
>
>--
>regards
>tim mcgrath
>TEDIS   fremantle  western australia 6160
>phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142
>

---

• From: Karsten Riemer <Karsten.Riemer@east.sun.com>
• To: duane@xmlglobal.com, BrianE@DataChannel.com
• Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 00:08:02 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)

My first issue, you say you accepted it, so I expected to see the title for
chapter 7 to read "ebXML recommended methodology"

but the title now reads "ebXML Architecture Recommended Methodology"
What does that mean?

Please change "ebXML Architecture Recommended Methodology" to "ebXML
recommended methodology" both in the title of chapter 7, and wherever else
this phrase may occur.

First sentence in 7.1. should probably read "UMM, the recommended methodology
for ebXML ...."

On line 331 Right underneath figure 2, it again says the "ebXML Architecture
is broken down into" this should read "UMM is broken down into ..."

Line 335: "ebXML reference model" s/b "UMM"


Section 6.3 is not about the FSV as the title says, but it is the overall
architecture of ebXML. That could in fact be the title "ebXML overall
Architecture", but then you need to describe it as such, instead of writing
only about UID's.

I consider resolution of these items part of the original issue that you said
you accepted, so it is back to being a showstopper for me.

-karsten

---