RE: ebXML Question re: Comments by Organizations

[kyle.hurst@expeditors.com]

Yup.  As I mentioned, there are definitely difficulties with it, which could be
likened to quicksand.  But, by not doing something along those lines, it is no
longer an individual based system, either.

If we are talking about democracy here where each individual gets a vote, we are
now looking at the same reasons why the electoral ballot system was designed, to
make actual ideas and votes manageable while still accounting for the varying
populations of each state.  The group theory serves for keeping down the number
of E-mails being sent so that the ideas and decision of 20 people can be
encapsulated in a single E-mail on a single account.  My suggestion is that we
recognize that E-mail as 20, instead of one.

Possible suggestions for tracking this would be a) a quick survey for the
existing members and b) a new question during sign in for the newer members.
I'm not familiar with how "vote" weighing is currently done, but I'm sure a
solution could be designed which is both fair and effective.

Best regards,
______________________________________
Kyle M. Hurst
Senior EDI Coordinator
Expeditors International

voice:  206-674-6524
fax: 206-246-3197
e-mail:  kyle.hurst@expeditors.com



Please respond to rachelf@ix.netcom.com

To:   Kyle Hurst/IS/Expeditors, rawlins@metronet.com
cc:   lms@wwnet.com, sutor@us.ibm.com, 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, raywalker@attglobal.net,
      scott.nieman@NorstanConsulting.com, "'List, ebXML Requirements'"
      <ebXML-Requirements@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject:  RE: ebXML Question re: Comments by Organizations




I don't believe that Kyle's proposal is workable...there is simply no
realistic nor reliable way to ascertain the number of individuals within an
organization that one should count. How would one count X12, for example?
This path is a huge pit of quicksand.

Rachel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: kyle.hurst@expeditors.com [mailto:kyle.hurst@expeditors.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 2:16 PM
> To: rawlins@metronet.com
> Cc: lms@wwnet.com; sutor@us.ibm.com; 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
> Subject: Re: ebXML Question re: Comments by Organizations
>
>
>
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> I'm new to the group, but I think that I have a potential
> solution.  In the area
> where there is a group, we could determine how many people
> comprise that group
> and a suggestion from them would count for 'x' number of
> individuals.  This, of
> course, wouldn't apply to how many people work at the
> company, only those
> directly related to the ebXML initiative.
>
> There are holes and difficulties with this solution, but I
> think that overall it
> will be pretty fair.  After all just because I work at the
> same place as five
> other folks involved with ebXML shouldn't mean that all five
> of us only count as
> one vote.
>
> Best regards,
> ______________________________________
> Kyle M. Hurst
> Senior EDI Coordinator
> Expeditors International
>
> voice:  206-674-6524
> fax: 206-246-3197
> e-mail:  kyle.hurst@expeditors.com
>
>
>
> Please respond to rawlins@metronet.com
>
> To:   lms@wwnet.com
> cc:   sutor@us.ibm.com, 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>
> (bcc: Kyle
>       Hurst/IS/Expeditors)
> 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/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>