RE: Summary of findings of TA Spec. review.

[Rik Drummond <rvd2@worldnet.att.net>]

I think these questions need to be address before further action is taken
by ta, qr, stc, or the executive committee:

- the qr needs to say one of the sections is an architecture example so
follow its structure for the others, or
- give an example of an architecture from some where else so that ta will
have a target they can address.

it is hard to fix something when statements "like it is not an architecture"
are said with out detailed points of why it is not.

best regards, rik



-----Original Message-----
From: Tim McGrath [mailto:tmcgrath@tedis.com.au]
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2000 11:31 PM
To: sutor@us.ibm.com
Cc: duane; Klaus-Dieter Naujok; Bill Smith; Ray Walker;
ebxml-coord@lists.ebxml.org; ebxml-stc@lists.ebxml.org;
ebxml-architecture@lists.ebxml.org
Subject: Re: Summary of findings of TA Spec. review.


our summary states that we reviewed...
ebXML Technical Architecture Specification Version:  (0.8.71) Release Date:
13/9/2000

we understand this to be the latest one (downloaded via Duane's URL).  it is
certainly not the version discussed in San Jose.  we aplogise if that was
the impression given.

i hope that clarifies the first point.

next !?

sutor@us.ibm.com wrote:

> Before we get too far on this, let's confirm that the QR team saw the
> document
> you thought they were supposed to see and then take it from there. Tim,
> Nagwa?
>
> Bob
> ..........................................................
> Bob Sutor
> Program Director, e-business Standards Strategy
> Office 716-243-2445 / IBM Tieline 320-9138 / Fax 716-243-1778 / Cellular
> 716-317-6899
> Text messaging 7163176899@messaging.sprintpcs.com
> sutor@us.ibm.com  -  http://www.ibm.com/xml

--
regards
tim mcgrath
TEDIS   fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142