RE: [plcs] PLCS TC Organization Workplan Overview

["Rob Bodington" <rob.bodington@eurostep.com>]

That makes sense to me, a number of the DEXs are either complimentary or have a
significant overlap. 

Regards
Rob

-------------------------------------------   
Rob Bodington
Eurostep Limited
Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com
Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com
Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030
Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401



-----Original Message-----
From: nfn@lsc.co.uk [mailto:nfn@lsc.co.uk] 
Sent: 10 February 2005 15:51
To: plcs@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [plcs] PLCS TC Organization Workplan Overview

An observation from a quick look at the Kreiler / Rutland Workplan Overview.

Should we be defining development teams by the specific DEX they are developing?
As funding to undertake any development is most likely to be made available
through implementation projects requiring a range of DEXs, would we not be
better off identifying a number of development teams under the wing of the
Technical Committee and then assigning particular DEX development
responsibilities to them (there probably being more DEXs to be developed than we
will ever achieve funded teams)? For example : Team 1 to deliver DEX 1 & 8, Team
4 to deliver DEX 4 & 9 etc.