Re: QR for deliverables with a technical content

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

Tim,

Let me clarify what was actually said during the StC call. It was much more than quoted and I believe needs the context it was made in.

Simon made the point that for XML One the response to the call for papers by PT leads was not very good. He also made the point that the dead line for submission was soon. At that point Tim raised the question should all submissions, papers and slides FIRST be reviewed by QRT since it is their responsibility to do so. At this point I stated that a) having just heard from Tim that the work load is huge for QRT and this may result in some specifications not being reviewed in time, and b) the time to submit is approaching in a few weeks, it would not be wise to delay any papers and submissions. Further, the presentation that QRT was to review where those that we make available to anyone to use when they present ebXML. My view was and still is, if our PT leads can not present their work correctly we will be in big trouble. Simon supported that view and added as a suggestion that Marketing will review the presentations from a consistency point, such as presentation layout and terminology. This was agreed by all on the call including you and Bob G.

As to your request, the Executive will review it and get back to you soon.

Klaus




--Original Message Text---
From: Tim McGrath
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 16:23:33 +0800

The Quality Review team have asked me the clarify a comment made at the Steering Committee Meeting of Dec. 20th.

My recollection is that Klaus stated it was not necessary for QR to review the papers submitted by project teams for presentation at XML One in London next March.

It is the opinion of the QR Team that there are recurring concerns about inconsistency and different interpretations with material presented by ebXML participants. If XML One is to a be major milestone in ebXML's public roll-out then we must ensure quality and consistency at both a technical and a marketing level. We believe the QR Team are in the best position to undertake this.

This position is supported by two items in our Team's terms of reference. Our purpose is to review ebXML deliverables for quality and consistency. Deliverables include:

                          Technical Specifications 
                          Public documents with technical content 
                          Public presentations (inc. the Quarterly Technical Orientation presentations) 
                          Technical content on the ebXML website


Can you clarify the Executive's understanding of QR for these public deliverables?

--
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