Re: [ebxml-cppa-negot] Notes on publication of a party's NDD

[Martin Sachs <msachs@cyclonecommerce.com>]

Monica,

I agree with your comment below. My suggestion below about a negotiability 
indicator is definitely a futures item. I have pencilled into the draft a 
couple of clarifying points (that are within the scope of the current 
design) regarding when a party does not publish an NDD. They are the points 
I made earlier in the message you referred to.

Regards,
Marty



At 09:24 PM 11/23/2003, Monica J. Martin wrote:
>Marty Sachs wrote......
>
> >
> >         *One Party does not Publish an NDD*
> >
> >     Consider defining more precisely the case where a /Party/ does not
> >     publish an /NDD/. Following is one possibility:
> >     If a /Party/ does not publish an /NDD/, it means that the /Party/
> >     will not negotiate. This requires a /Party/ to publish an /NDD/ if
> >     the /Party/ is willing to negotiate.
> >     Add a negotiability indicator to the /NDD/. Its values could be:
> >
> >         * Normal /NDD/ that indicates what is negotiable.
> >         * Contact me privately for my /NDD/.
> >         * Everything is negotiable.  With this value of the indicator,
> >           the /Party/ does not include any specific items in the NDD.
> >
>mm1: Marty, when the last item occurs, we currently can't handle it
>because several items in version 1 are undefined for negotiation.
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of 
>the OASIS TC), go to 
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-cppa-negot/members/leave_workgroup.php. 
>

*************************************
Martin Sachs
standards architect
Cyclone Commerce
msachs@cyclonecommerce.com