Re: [emergency] Draft TC Letter on HazCollect

[Art Botterell <acb@incident.com>]

On Jun 13, 2006, at 6/13/06 5:33 PM, Carl Reed OGC Account wrote:
> I am not trying to be overly sticky on the semantics, but if I were  
> on the NOAA side, I would ask the question "and what exactly do you  
> mean by compliance?"

In reality, however, nobody at NOAA has questioned that.  Instead,  
they've asked, "non-compliant in what regard?" and we've explained  
the problem with their modification of the definition of  
<description>, and they've agreed it needs to be fixed.  The only  
issue has been whether the fix could be deferred.

I'm thinking we might be wise to focus on the question actually on  
the table right now and defer conjecture till later.  The present  
issue is a very simple and pragmatic one and I think all that's  
required is a bit of reinforcement of what's already been said.

- Art