[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [election-services] Deprecating EML 120 for EML 330 in V6
John, although I agree with David's desire for a
sanity check, I can support your supposition from my experience.
I don't have any practical use, only samples that I have played with.
So, I can't give you an indication of how true users will react if we change
it. From: John Borras [mailto:john@pensive.eu] Sent: 2009-03-29 10:49 AM To: David RR Webber (XML); paul.spencer@boynings.co.uk Cc: eml Subject: RE: [election-services] Deprecating EML 120 for EML 330 in V6 OK I understand and agree your logic, but I doubt apart from Paul who raised the issue of removing the 120 that we have much if any experience of using it.
Paul – Is there anything in the 120 that we can remove in this transition?
John
From: David RR Webber
(XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
John,
Was hoping for input from the team first. People who are using 120 and 330 and how they see this needs to be aligned. Things change so we need a sanity check - on whether these should be continued - I don't just want to blindly put things in without understanding the role and purpose they then fulfil in the 330. If we can simplify and rationalize then we should take this opportunity to do that.
Thanks, DW
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]