Re: [emergency-msg] Reminder: Meeting in very few minutes RE:[emergency-msg] Follow-up: Please check Section 3.11.3

[<hamgva@cox.net>]

Ouch,

Missed the meeting due to another meeting running over and me not resetting the phone to beep me.

Sorry folks.  I hope we hat enough members.

Gary


---- Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com> wrote: 
> Reminder we have a meeting in a few minutes to approve EDXL-RM for it 
> second (final-we hope) 60-Day Public Review.
> 
> Like you needed the reminder, eh?
> Rex
> 
> 
> At 9:36 AM -0600 1/31/08, Patti Aymond wrote:
> >Tim,
> >
> >Yup. You're right. My bad.
> >
> >Patti
> >
> >Patti Iles Aymond, PhD
> >Chief Technology Director
> >DQSI Corporation
> >19218 North 5th Street
> >Covington, LA 70433
> >(985) 871-7472 x 211 (voice)
> >(985) 871-1072 (fax)
> >www.dqsi.com
> >
> >From: Timothy Grapes [mailto:tgrapes@evotecinc.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 8:57 AM
> >To: 'Rex Brooks'; emergency-msg@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Alessandro 
> >Triglia'; hamgva@cox.net; 'Patti Iles Aymond'; 
> >ltincher@evotecinc.com; dellis@sandia.gov
> >Subject: RE: [emergency-msg] Follow-up: Please check Section 3.11.3
> >
> >Rex,
> >I believe at some point we added the second bullet but didn't delete 
> >the first.  The first bullet is incorrect and should be removed 
> >since a ReleaseResource message can in fact be an initial message. 
> >It does not require a previous message.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Tim
> >
> >From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 8:26 AM
> >To: Timothy Grapes'; emergency-msg@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Alessandro 
> >Triglia'; hamgva@cox.net; Patti Iles Aymond; ltincher@evotecinc.com; 
> >dellis@sandia.gov
> >Subject: [emergency-msg] Follow-up: Please check Section 3.11.3
> >
> >Hi again Folks,
> >
> >I'm writing about this again because I think we have to correct or 
> >clarify this before EDXL-RM goes out, so this time I'm going to go 
> >into detail.
> >
> >3.11 is the Release Resource message. the two bullets in 3.11.3 are:
> >
> >ResponseInformation:PrecedingResourceInfoElementID and 
> >ResponseInformation:ResponseType elements MUST be present.
> >If a ResourceInformation:ResponseInformation element is present, 
> >then the ResponseInformation:PrecedingResourceInfoElementID and 
> >ResponseInformation:ResponseType elements MUST be present.
> >
> >How can subelements of ResponseInformation be required if the parent 
> >element ResourceInformation:ResponseInfromation is optional?
> >
> >I think we need to either delete one of the bullets to be 
> >consistent, or else make ResourceInformation:ResponseInformation 
> >Required, which means changing the diagram and the table and the 
> >Element Matrix. Or else we leave a conundrum. Regardless, we need to 
> >agree on what we do or don't do on this.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Rex
> >
> >
> >
> >Hi Folks,
> >
> >Please check bullets 7 and 8 of Section 3.11.3. They repeat each 
> >other and somewhat contradict each other. I'm not going to stop or 
> >change it since this is taking longer than I thought it would. I'm 
> >keeping a page of notes on things that I think need to be looked 
> >over but this is the first one that actually caused me to stop long 
> >enough to send out a message about it. I have incorporated everyone 
> >else's proofing, so if you find anything, please keep a list and 
> >check the next version I post against your list, since it would not 
> >be a good idea for me to stop and rewind now that I'm going through 
> >it in great detail.
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Rex
> >--
> >Rex Brooks
> >President, CEO
> >Starbourne Communications Design
> >GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
> >Berkeley, CA 94702
> >Tel: 510-898-0670
> 
> 
> -- 
> Rex Brooks
> President, CEO
> Starbourne Communications Design
> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
> Berkeley, CA 94702
> Tel: 510-898-0670