[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: ebXML Question re: Comments by Organizations
Bob, Thanks. That's a well articulated, common sense type of answer that reflects what I was thinking. I still would like to see some other opinions though, and have it on the agenda for our next call. Mike sutor@us.ibm.com wrote: > I don't think that there is a formula to tell you how to weight any given > submission. I do think that it is important to attach the contributor to > the submission when you are considering it so you can gauge the > context for information. If a large organization proposes something > that you consider outlandish, you should do some work to understand > why it submitted it and whether it is really considered a high priority. > You might not have the cycles to do quite so much work for individual > submissions, though ultimately you need an explanation of why you > included or excluded any particular requirement. > > .......................................................... > Bob Sutor > Program Director, XML Technology > 716-243-2445 / Fax 716-243-1778 / Tieline 320-9138 > Cellular 716-317-6899 / Pager 1-800-946-4645 PIN # 1473757 > sutor@us.ibm.com > > Mike Rawlins <rawlins@metronet.com> on 03/28/2000 12:26:17 PM > > Please respond to rawlins@metronet.com > > To: lms@wwnet.com > cc: Robert S Sutor/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, anders.grangard@edifrance.org, > annabelle.bullen@us.pwcglobal.com, bill.smith@sun.com, > dick.raman@cab-edi.net, drummond@onramp.net, duane@xmlglobal.com, > klaus@templar.net, plevine@telcordia.com, rachelf@ix.netcom.com, > raywalker@attglobal.net, scott.nieman@norstanconsulting.com, "List, > ebXML Requirements" <ebXML-Requirements@lists.oasis-open.org> > Subject: ebXML Question re: Comments by Organizations > > I would like some guidance about how to deal with specification comments > received from an organization. It is clear that ebXML membership and > voting is by individual, the group being composed of individual > "experts". However, comments on specifications are not quite so > clear. Most of the comments on the ebXML Requirements Specification > came from individuals. We did receive one submission from CEN/ISSS as > an organization commenting. I think it appropriate to review the > comments, but I find the submission somewhat troublesome. Are we under > any obligation to give the comments more weight than others because they > came from a group? Should we treat them as just another individual > commenting? Or, should we not consider their comments since we are > functioning as individuals? (NOTE: I don't see this as a problem with > comments submitted by other ebXML project teams, particularly when they > relate directly to their respective requirements in the specification). > > I feel certain that we will run into this again as the other > specifications are released for comment. So, I think it important that > we decide on a policy soon and clearly articulate it. I would like to > see some first impressions on the listserv, but ask Klaus and Bob to put > this on the agenda for our next steering committee call. > > Mike > > -- > Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EDI Consulting > http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/ -- Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EDI Consulting http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC