RE: [regrep] PR for specs

["Breininger, Kathryn R" <kathryn.r.breininger@boeing.com>]

1. NO
2. That should be fine.
3. The record in Kavi has the correct URL in it.  Have you looked at it?  Anyone who looks at it will see it is there.  The PR is taking viewers to the page where ALL of our documents are located, as well as an opportunity to learn more about our TC.  Please note that the articles say "For more details please see:..."  I disagree with your premise.  We are not presenting two different locations for the spec documents.

-----Original Message-----
From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:farrukh.najmi@sun.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 4:32 PM
To: Breininger, Kathryn R
Cc: ebXML Regrep (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [regrep] PR for specs


Breininger, Kathryn R wrote:

>Farrukh,
>It is posted correctly to the correct location, as I already stated.  The OASIS webmaster posted it to the URL below, the Registry TC documents page points to it.  It is on the OASIS server, which is why the webmaster had to post it and we could not.  However, without creating the Kavi record that points to it, no one could find it from our Registry TC page.  I hope this answers all your questions.  
>  
>
I apologize for continuing on this topic but....

Here are my specific concerns:

1. Do we have two copies at two different locations for our normative 
spec content? If the answer is yes then that is a serious problem no 
matter which location is the one we agreed upon.

2. The spec normatively defines the location to be:

[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/regrep/documents/2.5/

So we are stuck with having our normative spec content at that location no matter which location is the one we agreed upon.

It is just find for our TC web page (not the documents page) to have a hyperlink to [1]

It is not OK to be telling people of two different locations for our specs, [1] in the specs and the Kavi locations in PR.

Lets discuss this in our meeting tomorrow.


-- 
Farrukh