[Fwd: QR review]

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@tedis.com.au>]

just to keep you informed of a discussion on the Steering Committee.

I suspect sending the details may have caused more issues than it
resolved.

what this discussion fails to recognise is the the Executive endorsed
our recommendations and the the QR team was not just a name change of
Tech Coordination.

--
regards
tim mcgrath
TEDIS   fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142

---

• From: Rik Drummond <rvd2@worldnet.att.net>
• To: "ebXML SC, List server" <ebXML-StC@lists.ebxml.org>
• Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:48:26 -0500

will recheck the trp portion and let you know.  i also have concerns that we
are not checking for alignment. who is to do this?.. best regards, rik

-----Original Message-----
From: agrangard@nycall.com [mailto:anders.grangard@edifrance.org]
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 5:22 AM
To: ebXML SC, List server
Cc: ebXML-Architecture List
Subject: QR review


We today received the comments behind the QR recommendation not to circulate
the Technical Architecture specification to the full ebXML community. It
contains many good and valid points and we are, wherever possible,
addressing these points. Some questions, though;

What is the role of the QR team? My recollection of the Technical
Coordination was that it should review the quality of the specifications
and, more importantly, ensure that the specifications are aligned with each
other. Maybe this changed with the PT name change since the majority of
comments now address contents and hardly any alignment checking (at least
not explicitly).

I sincerely hope the all the " I mean, I think, IMHO, etc" is a case of
uncareful typing. If these indeed are individual comments rather than a QR
team effort, they should be treated as such.

What is required from our team to get this specification to the next step?
If the answer would be that all comments have to be resolved, I do not see
this happening any time soon as there are  bound to be differences in
opinion on many of them. To resolve this quickly I would suggest that one or
two persons from the QR team would join us in the TechArch conference call
the 5th October. Secondly if each PT lead would give us an indication on how
well/poorly the TechArch specification aligns with their specifications, I
think we can regain some lost time.

Kind regards
Anders Grangard

Anders Grangard
Edifrance
Ingénieur - Consultant en Commerce électronique
Tel: +33 (0)1 42 91 62 24
http://www.edifrance.org

---

begin:vcard 
n:McGrath;Tim
tel;pager:+61(0)299633829
tel;cell:+61 (0)438352228
tel;fax:+61(0)893352142
tel;work:+61(0)893352228
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:tmcgrath@tedis.com.au 
x-mozilla-cpt:;-19376
fn:tim mcgrath
end:vcard