RE: updated requirements document

["Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>]

Marty

Apart from my earlier comments about using Party rather than Trading
Partner, more detailed comments are in the attached.

I can't make the call tomorrow as I'm on a flight, but I strongly suggest
that we decide whether to use Party or Trading Partner in the requirements
before we release the document. 

Since other groups (i.e. CC and TRP) are using Party rather than Trading
Partner, my vote would be to use Party for consistency with prior work.

David


-----Original Message-----
From: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 1:51 PM
To: ebxml-tp@lists.ebxml.org
Subject: updated requirements document


I have updated the Requirements document based on the recent responses to
the previous version.  I especially want to thank David Burdett for changes
and additions which considerably improve the document.

Please review and comment at your earliest convenience.  I plan to ask the
attendees at tomorrow's conference call to decide if we can consider that
we have completed work on the requirements so that we can move on to the
next stage.

If there are any ebXML formalities that must be observed for the
requirements document, someone please enlighten me.

Regards,
Marty

(See attached file: partner-requirements.doc)

****************************************************************************
*********

Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
****************************************************************************
*********

partner-requirements1 David B.doc