Re: Issues with ebXML Glossary

[Klaus-Dieter Naujok <knaujok@home.com>]

Tim,

From what I read into the message you copied, the intention is not to put out the Glossary for a "public" review but a internal "limited" review. There for it is the project teams call to include QRT or not. QRT is reviewing all ebXML material with technical content that is for public review. After TA processed the feedback (more editing) I am sure they than plan to go for a full public review which includes as the first step QRT.

This is my first take on this topic. Anders will arrive here in Tokyo in the next 24/36 hours. I will get some clarification from him.

Regards,

Klaus

--Original Message Text---
From: Tim McGrath
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 09:30:45 +0800

The Quality Review Team wish to bring to the attention of the Executive a decision by the TA Team not to submit the ebXML Glossary for a Quality Review.

The statement below comes from their list server.... Subject:
Tr: ebXML glossary
Date:
Thu, 26 Oct 2000 15:29:43 +0200
From:
"agrangard@nycall.com"
To:
ebXML-Architecture List

It seems that neither I nor Collin have received any comments from the
TechArch on the glossary which was distributed last Friday. If I do not hear
any major concerns today, I will distributed it to the steering committee
tomorrow morning for information/comments. I do not view the document as a
specification at this point and will consequently not request a QR.





We understood our terms of reference covered 'ebXML deliverables with a technical content' and not just 'specifications'. The ebXML Glossary is a key reference document spanning all ebXML projects and is critical to achieving consistency. As such we believe it should qualify for a Quality Review.

Can you advise?


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


--
Klaus-Dieter Naujok                         ebXML & TMWG Chair
Antioch, CA USA                                +1.925.759.1670