Re: Work Plan Change, Agenda for 1/7, and Issues List

[Mike Rawlins <rawlins@metronet.com>]

Mark, thanks very much for putting all of the comments into one document.  I suggest that we
all keep this for reference, but on first reading I believe we need to do considerable
editing and condensing before we come up with the final specification.   People offered many
comments which were great background, analysis, and opinions.  However, I don't think they
belong in a requirement specification.  What we need to focus on are specific, concise
requirements distilled from the comments that people offered.  I expect that the final
document may be less than 50% of the size of this draft.

Again, I propose that we make reviewing the specification and submissions a secondary
priority on the conference calls.  The primary priority should be to discuss issues.  We will
have plenty of time in Orlando to go over each of the submissions and review the final
document.

Regards,

Mike

Mark CRAWFORD wrote:

>                                        Name: XML Requirements Version 0_1.txt
>    XML Requirements Version 0_1.txt    Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
>                                    Encoding: 7bit
>
>                        Name: Removed Text.txt
>    Removed Text.txt    Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
>                    Encoding: 7bit
>
>                                        Name: XML Requirements Version 0_1.doc
>    XML Requirements Version 0_1.doc    Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword)
>                                    Encoding: x-uuencode
>
>                                Name: Removed Text in Word.doc
>    Removed Text in Word.doc    Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword)
>                            Encoding: x-uuencode
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To All,
>
>     As promised in yesterdays message, I have taken the consolidated document of
> requirements submissions I sent out yesterday and attempted to reorganize within
> the bounds of the outline Mike had previously submitted (although there were
> some instances where I have added an element or two to the outtline.)  (See XML
> Requirements Version 0_1) .  Per a number of members requests, I have included
> both plain text (with line breaks) and Word versions.
>
> Please understand this is a first cut - I am sure there are components that I
> have put in the wrong section and ask you to point those out.  I have not yet
> attempted to do any editorial changes.  I believe I have captured all relevent
> comments, but to ensure that I didn't leave anything meaningful out, I am also
> attaching another file that contains all deleted text (by author) that is not
> included in the requirements document.
>
>
>
>     Mark
> Mark Crawford
> Research Fellow
> ______
> LMI Logistics Management Institute
> 2000 Corporate Ridge, McLean, VA 22102-7805
> (703) 917-7177   Fax (703) 917-7518
> mcrawfor@lmi.org
> http://www.lmi.org
> "Opportunity is what you make of it"

--
Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EDI Consulting
http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/