[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Editing tasks.
Peter, Just thought I'd let you know that "conclusions" was removed from the outline during the F2F. The consensus was that it wasn't appropriate for a spec (it would be for a whitepaper...). If you feel differently, by all means, make some noise :-) Regards, Matt On 27-Apr-05, at 6:34 AM, Peter F Brown wrote: > Matt: > As indicated at our kick-off meeting, I'd like to concentrate on: > 3. Glossary > 4. Relationship to other standards; and > 9. References > In other words, the reference sections of the spec and their internal > coherence. IMO, this would also include flagging contributors using > ambiguous terms or text in any submission. > > In addition, I would like to lend a hand to section 7. Conclusions, > particularly as regards language used. > > Talk later, > > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:email@example.com] > Sent: 26 April 2005 16:19 > To: 'SOA-RM' > Subject: [soa-rm] Editing tasks. > > Folks, > > One thing that I'd like to talk about is assigning sections to editors. > Can the editing team please look at the pdf I checked into Kavi and > state > your preferences? What sections do you want to work on? > > Thanks. > > -Matt > > >