RE: proposed Executive Summary paragraph

[Karsten Riemer <Karsten.Riemer@East.Sun.COM>]

BP/Core,

I like Bob Miller's wording. Filling in the abbreviations, and substituting
using some text suggested by Bill McCarthy, here is what it would look like:
(There was also a suggestion by Bob Haugen to drop the last paragraph, I would
like to hear votes pro/con on that)

Executive Summary:

The ebXML Specification Schema provides a standard framework by which
business systems may be configured to support execution of business
transactions.  It is based upon prior UN/CEFACT work, specifically the
UN/CEFACT Unified Modeling Methodology (UMM) defined in the N90 specification.


The current version of the specification schema facilitates the
infrastructure release of ebXML's Transport/Routing/Packaging (TRP), Trading
Partner (TP), and Registry/Repository (RegRep) specifications. 

A subsequent version will address additional desired(required?) features
such as the semantics of economic exchanges and contracts, multi-party
choreography, and context based content.




>Hi All,
>
>In my opinion, the first sentence alone would cause most executives to stop
>reading!
>It is littered with acronyms and somewhat sophisticated technical jargon.
>
>Here is my attempt for your consideration:
>  (NOTE: "..." is to be filled in with readable text defining the following
>acronym)
>
>Executive Summary:
>
>The ebXML Specification Schema provides a standard framework by which
>business systems may be configured to support execution of business
>transactions.  It is based upon prior UN/CEFACT work, specifically the
>...(UMM) defined in ... 
>
>The current version of the specification schema facilitates the
>infrastructure release of ebXML's ...(TRP), ...(TP), and ...(RegRep)
>specifications. 
>
>A subsequent version will address additional desired(required?) features
>such as  Resources/Events/Agents, multi-party choreography, and context
>based content. 
>
>Cheers,
>         Bob Miller