Subject: RE: vOTE CALL: RE: Counter Proposal Paper Draft 0.9
Waqar, I agree fully. I am surprised anything has happened at all in this group - it is always so confrontational, hardly an environment for collaboration. It would be helpful if other people jumped in and made suggestions as well, it seems at times as if this group is a one man show. -- Matthew MacKenzie VP Research & Development XML Global Technologies, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Waqar Sadiq [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: January 12, 2001 7:44 AM To: 'David RR Webber'; Farrukh Najmi Cc: 'ebxml repository ' Subject: RE: vOTE CALL: RE: Counter Proposal Paper Draft 0.9 There has to be a way of resolving all this and picking the best technical solution without getting personal or taking things personal. It would just improve the atmosphere a bit and ease the tension, allowing everyone to focus on the technical merits of the proposals without being distracted by the slander. Thanks, Waqar Sadiq -----Original Message----- From: David RR Webber [mailto:Gnosis_@compuserve.com] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 9:29 AM To: Farrukh Najmi Cc: 'ebxml repository ' Subject: Re: vOTE CALL: RE: Counter Proposal Paper Draft 0.9 Message text written by Farrukh Najmi >> I recommend a NO vote because: > - Its not obvious to my how this proposal is better than the existing > proposal (from a pros cons point of view). > - the state of this document needs work > - the estimated time to incorporate this document is great > - the "dynamics" of this project team reminds me of a bunch of old mules > that prevent us from agreeing on a quick path > > We'll have more time to talk later about this document, as I want more > information such as the origin etc. I do see some interesting use cases, > but again, not enough time. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Halleluh - what a surprise - and my prediction hath come to pass. Privately I made the prediction on Monday that - once I had busted my chops this week and hustled on all this - the final analysis from the Sun bastion would be - we have not had enough time, there is not enough time, there's not been enough time spent on this. Frankly this is a tired and broken record. Let's see now - 20 odd methods - 5 odd people, 4 a piece. If we focus in on REALLY getting an abstraction layer API built here - it is possible. However - at the start of the week I had plenty of specific detail 'Oh - you're inventing your own scripting process / query syntax", now I've attempt to listen to that by allowing implementors to specify that in a programming tool of their choice 'Oh - its too vague, it does not give specifics'. Ok - well the bottom line for me is that OQL query statements is something no DBA worth their salt would allow against a backend server over an open channel. So what's it to be? I can add more specifics back in - but then I am I going to hear shouts of 'foul' again? Someone else can run round the track, work up a sweat, be pelted with rocks, and then told to run round the opposite way this time. Thanks, DW.
BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 N:MacKenzie;Matthew FN:Matthew MacKenzie NICKNAME:Matt ORG:XML Global Technologies, Inc.;Research & Development TITLE:VP Research & Development TEL;WORK;VOICE:(604) 717-1100 TEL;VOICE:(800) 201-1848 TEL;WORK;FAX:(604) 717-1107 ADR;WORK;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:;;1818 Cornwall Avenue=0D=0ASuite 9;Vancouver;British Columbia;V6J 1C7;Canad= a LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:1818 Cornwall Avenue=0D=0ASuite 9=0D=0AVancouver, British Columbia V6J 1C7= =0D=0ACanada URL: URL:http://www.xmlglobal.com EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:email@example.com EMAIL;INTERNET:matt@GoXML.com REV:20001228T191617Z END:VCARD
Powered by eList eXpress LLC