Re: [ebxml-cppa] TC approval of specification version 1.9 for initialpublic review

[Martin W Sachs <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>]

 We want this period to be long enough to give everyone a chance to comment
while not being so long that it prevents us from folding in the results of
the comments and still being on time for third-quarter approval. Commenters
will have a second shot at the spec when it is in the OASIS approval
process.

Regards,
Marty

*************************************************************************************

Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************


                                                                                                                 
                      James Bryce Clark                                                                          
                      <jamie.clark@mmie        To:       Dale Moberg <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>               
                      c.com>                   cc:       ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org, Martin W               
                                                Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS                                           
                      04/27/2002 05:29         Subject:  Re: [ebxml-cppa] TC approval of specification version   
                      PM                        1.9 for  initial public review                                   
                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                 



Thanks Dale.  As to the May 18 date in the proposed announcement:  I noted
that Marty votes for this short deadline in his message Saturday.  I have
no intrinsic problem with 2 weeks if it's a defensible answer.   May I
suggest that you confirm with OASIS whether there is a "usual" period.  I
have no idea whether 2 weeks is short, long or typical, among those
standards that do use public review -- I thought someone had talked about
30 days earlier, but have no data on OASIS rules, or ebXML practices
post-2001.
In light of the degree of press interest here, it would be helpful if we
avoided the appearance of using a remarkably or unusually abbreviated
period.   If there is such a thing in this context.   Regards  Jamie

At 08:00 AM 4/28/02, you wrote:
      The result of balloting has been unanimous approval for all returned
      vallots to begin the initial public review of the TC's ebXML CPPA
      core specification, * * * Here is the proposed language * * * "The
      OASIS ebXML CPPA Technical Committee has unanimously approved an
      initial public review period for their version 1.9 core
      specification."

      "For this initial public review period-- which will last until May
      18, 2002--all received comments will be considered by the Technical
      Committee; the committee will then include any changes motivated by
      the public comments that are received in a final 2.0 version." * * *