Re: [tax] Sub-committees

[Andy Greener <andy@gid.co.uk>]

I'm also happy to go along with Harm-Jan's suggestion.

If you're listening Michael, and in case there's any doubt, I'd like
to participate in the technical SC.

>I agree with Harm's approach. If we start with the sub-committees we
>know for sure that we need, we can always add as needed. To begin with,
>we can have the technical sub-committee look at the OECD work

I think this is a relatively urgent short-term goal - there is a Schema
already in existence for STF (the OECD "standard" transfer format) as
proposed by Arndt, and we should be examining this to see how it might fit
with existing standards such as UBL and ebXML Core Components.

> Glenda's
>suggestion, and other technical items. We can have the business
>sub-committee look at business processes and liaisons. As we get further
>along and produce some deliverables per our charter, we will be in a
>much better position to revisit the sub-committee makeup and decide. 
>
>"H.J.M. van Burg" wrote:
>>
>> Andy, John,
>>
>> As we look at the present list of participants in de TC, I do not know if we
>> have the luxury situation to have three subgroups yet. I think we could do
>> with two for the moment where one has a more technical scope and the other
>> one a more business approach.
>> Liaison with other bodies can take place on ad hoc basis, but most tiems, I
>> presume it will be technical.
>> I am fine with the descriptions produced so far but I would suggest that we
>> try to  start of with two groups. In my mind that was also the opinion
>> during the teleconference.
>> Of course we could do it otherwise.
>> Any suggestions?
>>
> > Harm-Jan

-- 

Andy Greener                         Mob: +44 7836 331933
GID Ltd, Reading, UK                 Tel: +44 118 956 1248
andy@gid.co.uk                       Fax: +44 118 958 9005