[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [business-transaction] Email vote - Issues 87 and 108 -votingendsTues May 30
As I said in a more long-winded response on bt-spec, this also works for me. It MUST be revisisted for movement beyond a committee draft, i.e., to an OASIS specification. bill cox William Z Pope wrote: > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
Attachment:
william.cox.vcf
Description: Card for William Cox
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC