RE: [business-transaction] Email vote - Issues 87 and 108 - votingendsTues May 30

[William Z Pope <zpope@pobox.com>]

Bill,
Regards the text for Issue 87 I'm glad that this is good enough for the
committee draft as that's our immediate objective.  The TC will need to
address the different conformance philosophies reflected in this draft
and in the descriptions in Issue 26 and 87.  Addressing that after 1.0
allows us to use feedback from other OASIS members outside the TC as
well as our own opinions.  That works for me.

=bill



-----Original Message-----
From: William Cox [mailto:william.cox@bea.com]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 11:56 PM
To: zpope@pobox.com
Cc: OASIS BTP (Main List)
Subject: Re: [business-transaction] Email vote - Issues 87 and 108 -
voting endsTues May 30


I vote YES on issue 87, with the following note:  This proposed conformance
statement is OK for a committee draft, but is not ready for the next stage.
Specifying "sort of" conformance has no useful place.

I vote YES on issue 108, with the following note:  Text should be added to
clarify
that (as in the problem statement) this isn't an issue with Atoms.

bill cox