RE: Request for proposals

["Mark A. Hale" <mark.hale@interwoven.com>]

Bob,

Thank you for following up from the meeting in Boston.

> Questions about proposals for Vancouver POCs:
> 1. Has it been decided to use the same business scenarios
>     as in Tokyo (GCI-retail and AIAG-automotive)?
>     Or are new business scenarios welcome?

Nothing specific has been decided until the proposals are put on the table by 
the December 15th.  However, the discussions at POC Tokyo had two components.  
First, we desire to reuse what we can so we can implement as much of the new 
specfications as possible. The team is open to increased vertical participation 
if there is active participation in producing the payloads and business 
processes in a form that is consistent with what the POC needs to implement. If 
there is specific backing for a new payload, please ask the backing team to 
participate as soon as possible in the POC activities.

> 2. There were a lot of agreements made in the Boston
>     F2F meetings last week.  The usual t's to be crossed
>     and i's to be dotted remain.  A POC demo that excercised
>     as many of those agreements as possible would be
>     invaluable to consolidate the decisions.  What status
>     do the specs need to be in by Friday to be considered
>     as part of a POC proposal?

The specifications will not be required until January 15th, the cut-off date 
for specifications that can be implemented for the Vancouver POC.  It would be 
very helpful if there were a reference to what portions of the specification 
are anticipated by January 15.

As a final note, the POC will need to pull together the proposals to go against 
as many of the specifications as we can in its scenarios (for instance, 
registry interactions require TR&P).  Please keep this in mind as the proposal 
comes together because an isolated scenario is less likely to be adopted into 
the final scenario.

     Thanks,

     Mark