Bingo Bob.
That’s exactly what I was missing in the document.
SOA is a cultural shift trying to break siloed application-centered
structure of today’s IT, comprised ofislands of data and automation and a
set of very expensive band aches gluing it all together. SOA is all about
decomposing enterprise (not application, as many believe) functionality into
a set of reusable, composable services, that are manged by a set of enterprise
processes, implementing required solutions.
From: Ellinger, Robert S
(IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 7:31 PM
To: Mike Poulin; Lublinsky, Boris; rexb@starbourne.com
Cc: Laskey, Ken; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
[soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
Mike:
We are trying to get to the same concept, but really what is
being discussed is a cultural paradigm shift. In my view, the execution
context is the technical context within which the service components exist and
within in which they are executed as enablers and support for the
process. The service components are the parts and subassemblies.
The process flow, which is part of the execution context, as defined by the
orchestration or choreography (both of which have business rules engines to
ensure that policies/standards/business rules/etc. are followed).
Business process modeling as instantiated by the assembled of
the SOA service components, with the associated business rule, links the system
to the business processes. Provided that the business processes serve the
goals or objectives or the business (that is provides value to the business)
then the tools as instantiated in the SOA service multiplies the effectiveness
of the process.
The cultural shift involves the fact that when business challenges
or opportunities arise, the business processes and SOA supporting services can
meet those challenge because SOA enable agile systems. I define agility
as “successful response to unexpected challenges and
opportunities.” BTW, this is the definition of the Agility Forum
(circa 1990) associated with Lehigh University (that is Nagel and his group
that wrote the book on the agile enterprise). Currently, the monolithic
architecture of most ERP-like systems do not allow agility, while functional
architecture place emphasis on optimizing for the function; creating
silos. There is an axiom in Systems Engineering that optimizing the
subsystems, sub-optimizes the system. SOA enables both optimization and
agility of the system, but requires mapping of the system to the
organization’s processes as the price
I could and have said a great deal more, but I think that is
enough. The linkage is there for anyone to get the maximum value out of
the SOA and both the business processes and the composite applications (process
assembled service components???) or whatever operating in the execution
context, must enable and support the processes. As the processes change
in response to challenges and opportunities, both the processes and the
composite application must respond quickly and successfully. This is not
the way it is done now, and that is the cultural change that is needed.
From: Mike Poulin
[mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 7:18 PM
To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Lublinsky, Boris; rexb@starbourne.com
Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
[soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
Robert,
as we know SOA defines Execution Context. Since we never defined what it
includes, I suggest (and promote this opinion) that EC includes Business EC and
Technical EC. Business services cannot be 'the environment of the SOA
Ecosystem' because it is included into SOA. Business EC defines business execution
policies and Technical EC defines technical execution policies. SOA Ecosystem
comprises both business and technical realms.
Phrase "while SOA services provide IT artifacts that facilitate
connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business
services."" has a problem because SOA service does not
necessary "facilitate connectivity of functional units". For
instance,a self-contained stand-alone business technical service realises
its own business function or feature w/o joining with other "functional
units". Plus, SOA Service may or may not contain any IT artefacts. Time
when SOA was considered a pure technical thing is gone (and for good).
I agree with you on "The value of IT is the same as any other tool".
This is why I think that statement " Business needs drive the development
of services delivered through IT, which provides the capability that satisfies
those needs. This is the business value of SOA" requires
corrections. Development of services is not necessary delivered through IT, it
may be purely manual business service and many services of such nature exist.
Based on my discussion in several Business Architecture groups on the Web, any
business process in Business may be defined as business service with or without
technical component. Implementation of the business service, as we know, is not
that important for service-oriented Architecture.
If we state that SOA positions BETWEEN Business and IT, we MAY NOT attribute it
to IT only and confront it with the business service. This is illogical.
- Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)"
To: "Lublinsky, Boris" , rexb@starbourne.com
Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , mpoulin@usa.com, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra]
positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:19:49 -0500
See below
-----Original Message-----
From: Lublinsky, Boris [mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:58 AM
To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); rexb@starbourne.com; Lublinsky, Boris
Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
[soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
I have no idea what this means:
"The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in
terms of its support of business services, which is its environment."
What is which environment?
Business services are the environment of the SOA Ecosystem.
Also:
" Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of
business outcome; while SOA services provide IT artifacts that
facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the
business services."
SOA services is a complete misnomer. Infrastructure I can buy, but SOA
services?
I disagree with that. The infrastructure provides nothing except an
operating context. Only when SOA Service (which in my understanding is
a composite application with contractual obligations) provide any value
to the customer.
And finally:
" Business needs drive the development of services delivered through IT,
which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the
business value of SOA."
This has several problems:
1. Business is concerned only with business services and drives their
design, not development 2. What is the business value? What does this
points to?
My understanding of the term development is that it includes design, but
if you want to change it...The value of IT is the same as any other
tool, to multiple the value of the process.
Adam Smith pointed this out in Chapter 1 of Book 1 of the Wealth of
Nations. This is a point lost on IT as this comment demonstrates.
I think we are digressing.
I hope not.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:46 AM
To: rexb@starbourne.com; Lublinsky, Boris
Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
[soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
Hi:
Please try this edit.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:34 AM
To: Lublinsky, Boris
Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com;
soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
[soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
Very minor grammar correction, Boris,
I'm just a nit picker.
;)
Rex
Lublinsky, Boris wrote:
> I haven't seen people discussing my grammar so much lately. I am doing
> something wrong sorry.
> I am fine with managing
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:07 AM
> To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS)
> Cc: Lublinsky, Boris; Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com;
> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm being technically challenged at the moment with remote participation
>
> in overlapping meetings the latter of which isn't starting and
> the former of which appears to have ended early while I dropped
> off to attend the latter.Sheseh!
>
> Here's how I would correct Boris's grammar with one word-substitution:
> I
>
> don't want the concept of "orchestration" being confused with
the use of
>
> "orchestrating" so I am changing that to "managing"
which we don't spend
>
> much attention on in the RAF yet .(I just want to avoid anyone asking if
>
> we mean that "all business services must be delivered via
> orchestration."):
>
> Business drives the definition of business services aligned with
> enterprise business functionality and business processes,
> managing execution of these services, while IT defines
> infrastructure services,
> providing support across a wide range of business services and
> implements both types of services. Such collaboration allows
> stronger communications between both, by creating one-to-one
> mapping between business and IT artifacts.
>
> Regardless, since it is clear that Bob did not actually pick up
> Boris's additions and so didn't drop them, and Ken had one more
> addition he was considering, could we ask Ken to correct Boris's
> grammar, fold in Bob's slight rewording and add his piece? Then,
> perhaps Jeff and/or Jim could make the crisp differentiation
> between business services and SOA services or between business
> services and IT
> services
>
> Cheers,
> Rex
>
> Ellinger, Robert S (IS) wrote:
>
>> Didn't intend to drop Boris's additions...must of missed them.
>> I thought we were to start from where you left off, so that is
>> what I
>>
> did.
>
>> Sorry Boris...Perhaps we were working concurrently and the material
crossed.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 1:10 AM
>> To: Lublinsky, Boris
>> Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com;
>> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
>>
>> My task was to get the work rolling. I have minor quibbles with
>>
> correct
>
>> English grammar in Boris's additions, and I agree with Jeff that
>> the distinction between "business service' and "SOA
service"
>> needs to be made. In general I think simpler is better, but as
>> long as the grammar is corrected, I'd be fine with Boris's
>> additions. I don't have any problems with Bob's minor rewording,
>> but i don't see why he dropped Boris's additions..
>>
>> I'll look at it again in the morning.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Rex
>>
>> Lublinsky, Boris wrote:
>>
>>
>>> You through away all changes that were suggested after this
initial
>>>
>>>
>> one?
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:41 PM
>>> To: rexb@starbourne.com
>>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
>>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
>>>
>>> I'd recommend some minor rewording... -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 1:16 PM
>>> To: rexb@starbourne.com
>>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
>>>
>>> First pass at the Section 1.2 as an additional paragraph after
>>> the first paragraph. I include the first paragraph and the
>>> start of the current second paragraph here for the context:
>>>
>>> 1.2 Service Oriented Archtecture - An Ecosystem Perspective
>>>
>>> Many systems cannot be understood by a simple decomposition into
>>>
> parts
>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>> and subsystems -- in particular when there are many
>>> interactions between the parts. For example, a biological
>>> ecosystem is a self-sustaining association of plants, animals,
>>> and the hysical environment in which they live. Undestanding an
>>> ecosystem often requires a holistic perspective rather than one
>>> focusing on the
>>>
>>>
>> system's individual parts.
>>
>>
>>> The SOA Ecosystem described in this document occupies the
>>> boundary between Business and IT. It is neither wholly IT nor
>>> wholly Business,
>>>
>
>
>>> but is of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own,
govern
>>>
>
>
>>> and manage this SOA Ecosystem. Both sets of concerns must be
>>> accommodated for the SOA Ecosystem to fulfill its purposes.
>>> Business
>>> needs drive the development of services delivered through IT,
>>> providing the capability that satisfies those needs. This is
>>> the business value of SOA.
>>>
>>> From a holistic perspective, a SOA-based system is a network
>>> of independent services, machines, the people who operate,
>>> affect, use and govern those services as well as ...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Rex
>>>
>>> Rex Brooks wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi Ken, Everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I believe that the email you are looking for is your reply to
Frank:
>>>>
>
>
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm-ra/email/archives
>
>>>> /
>>>> 200906/msg00012.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is what Frank Wrote Jun 14, 2009, at 7:12 PM:
>>>>
>>>> "I sympathize with the sentiment behind this. We have
>>>> consistently identified SOA as being at the boundary between
>>>> business and IT. It
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> neither wholly IT nor wholly business but is of both worlds.
>>>>
>>>> That represents potentially one of SOA's greatest
opportunities; and
>>>>
>
>
>>>> the source of its weaknesses: neither business nor IT can
completely
>>>>
>
>
>>>> own/grok SOA.
>>>>
>>>> Frank"
>>>>
>>>> The email referenced above contains the most or all of the
thread "Are
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> we being ignored?"
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure we would help ourselves if we say more than
"The
>>>> SOA Ecosystem described in this document occupies the boundary
>>>> between Business and IT. It is neither wholly IT nor wholly
>>>> Business, but is
>>>>
>
>
>>>> of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, govern
>>>> and manage this SOA Ecosystem. Both sets of concerns MUST be
>>>>
> accommodated
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>> for the SOA Ecosystem to fulfill its purposes."
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Rex
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Laskey, Ken wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> This is a reminder that this week we are scheduled to
discuss
>>>>>
> adding
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> the text on the overlap of SOA and business. Below is text
suggested
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> by Michael Poulin and there is another email from Boris
with a lot
>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> idea that would need to be condensed and
>>>>>
> added/substituted/combined.
>
>>>>> Let's get the discussion far enough along that we can
bring this to
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> (close to) closure by the end of Wednesday's call.
>>>>>
>>>>> I remember there was an email where Frank wrote something
very
>>>>>
> crisp
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> on this subject that I replied was exactly what we needed
to say.
>>>>> Unfortunately, I have no idea when that email thread
occurred. If
>>>>> someone could find it, I think it would be a good
contribution to the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Back to Mike's suggested text, two immediate things come
to mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Section 1.4 is a discussion of the views and this is
not a view
>>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> be added as 1.4.4. I think it fits after section 1.2,
possibly as
>>>>> another short section.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. It is not obvious to me what the phrase "the
similarity of
>>>>> the principles of the Value Networks business model"
means.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ken
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>>>>> -
>>>>> ------
>>>>>
>>>>> Dr. Kenneth Laskey
>>>>> MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934
>>>>> 7515 Colshire Drive fax:
>>>>> 703-983-1379
>>>>> McLean VA 22102-7508
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] Sent:
>>>>> Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:31 AM
>>>>> To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>>> Subject: [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between
IT and business
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> I join Francis and Boris in suggestion that SOA RA's
Introduction
>>>>> would benefit from adding a couple of paragraphs on the
>>>>> business aspects of SOA positioned across Business and IT.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the previous message I composed a few words for a small
section
>>>>> on
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> this topic and propose to discuss them as an initial draft
during the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> next (or following) Telecom. Proposed text may be found in
the middle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> of this message chain.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>>>>> -
>>>>> -----------
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: RE: todos for PR2
>>>>>
>>>>> From: mpoulin@usa.com To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: 8
>>>>>
> Sep
>
>>>>> 2009 16:21:26 -0000
>>>>>
>>>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>>>>> -
>>>>> -----------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and
business" is what I write
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> a lot for last few months. So, let me propose a strawman
for this
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> text:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> 1.4.4 Business Value of the Service Oriented Architecture
>>>>>
>>>>> A Service Oriented Architecture realizes principles of the
concept
>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> service orientation in the sphere of architecture. The
architecture
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> in the organisation comprises both business architecture
and
>>>>> technical architecture of the systems [ref. to TOGAF 9.0].
>>>>> While SOA-based systems address aspects of the technical
>>>>> architecture,
>>>>>
> the
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> similarity of the principles of the Value Networks
business model and
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> SOA allows us to see SOA as a conceptual bridge between
>>>>> corporate Business and IT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Noticed similarity opens up new possibilities for Business
and IT
>>>>>
> to
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> construct service-oriented customer-centric convergent
solutions
>>>>>
> for
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> business problems. Service orientation enables operational
>>>>> and technical flexibility, which contributes to business
>>>>> efficiency the
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> great deal. The Service Orientation concept has the
potential
>>>>> not only to align IT with Business, but also to align the
>>>>> entire
>>>>>
> company
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> with the market dynamics.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If the ideas in this writing are acceptable, I will work
on the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> wording.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> - Michael Poulin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>>>>> -
>>>>> -----------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Francis McCabe To:
>>>>> "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org RA"
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 19:24:08 -0700
>>>>>
>>>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>>>>> -
>>>>> -----------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. As Boris alluded to, I think that a paragraph or two in
>>>>> the introduction positioning SOA on the cusp between IT
and
>>>>> business could be very useful. It is also pretty faithful
to
>>>>> the RAF!
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. The concept of interaction in the RM referred
*everything*
>>>>> involved in interacting with services. For the RA we have
to
>>>>>
> unpack
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> that some. This is the foundation for the multi-leveled
concept of
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> joint action. This should go in Section 3.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. I think that Danny's security diagram should be updated
>>>>> and incorporated.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. The trust and willingness stuff should go in.
>>>>>
>>>>> 5. It would be good if we could go through the text
bolding defined
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> concepts.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>>>>> -
>>>>> -----------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>>>>> -
>>>>> -----------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next]
-- [Date
>>>>> Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Rex Brooks
>>> President, CEO
>>> Starbourne Communications Design
>>> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>>> Berkeley, CA 94702
>>> Tel: 510-898-0670
>>>
>>>
>>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS
>>> TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs
>>> in OASIS
>>> at:
>>>
>>>
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>>>
>>> The information contained in this communication may be
CONFIDENTIAL
>>>
>>>
>> and is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If
>> you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
>> any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
>> communication, or any
>>
> of
>
>> its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>> communication in error, please notify the sender and
>> delete/destroy
>>
> the
>
>> original message and any copy of it from your computer or paper
files.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Rex Brooks
>> President, CEO
>> Starbourne Communications Design
>> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>> Berkeley, CA 94702
>> Tel: 510-898-0670
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
>> that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in
>> OASIS at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.ph
>> p
>>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-898-0670
The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL and
is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of
its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify the sender and delete/destroy the
original message and any copy of it from your computer or paper files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
--
The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL and is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete/destroy the original message and any copy of it from your computer or paper files.
|