[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [tgf] TGF v2 Review
+1 Regards Nig Nig Greenaway Fujitsu Fellow FUJITSU Lovelace Road, Bracknell, Berkshire, RG12 8SN Tel: +44 (0) 843 354 5637 Internal: 7444 5637 Mob : +44 (0) 7867 833147 Internal: 7383 3147 E-mail: nig.greenaway@uk.fujitsu.com From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Peter F Brown I’m good with this. From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Chris Parker Chris Parker Managing Partner CS Transform Limited T: +44 7951 754060 F: +44 207 681 3908 Citizen Service Transformation From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of John Borras Just to be clear if we make the Exec Summary a Committee Note as is being proposed the question of normative doesn't come into play, everything is regarded as being non-normative. John From: Colin Wallis [mailto:Colin.Wallis@dia.govt.nz] << My main question is whether including the conformance criteria is the right thing to do? As well as nearly doubling the length, it introduces new terms and concepts that haven't been explained.>> Fair point, but it is a standard after all so that is the essence of its raison d’etre. If we were to, say, move it to an appendix/annex we would want to be sure that that was normative, under OASIS rules.. Cheers Colin From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Mark Woodward Chris and John, I agree with Chris that this would be best as a separate document, there is much more chance of it being read by the target audience. I think Chris has taken a sound approach in assembling, and I agree that this will make keeping the document in line with the Framework itself much easier. As a result the only suggestion I've made in the attached version is to merge and reduce two paragraphs into one, see what you think (it also removes another one of those errant references to cities). My main question is whether including the conformance criteria is the right thing to do? As well as nearly doubling the length, it introduces new terms and concepts that haven't been explained. Regards, Mark Mark Woodward Mill Beck Consulting Limited Tel: +44 (0) 7788 414553 On 14 Nov 2013, at 10:44, Chris Parker <chris.parker@cstransform.com> wrote: <TGF v2 Executive Summary v0.1.doc> Unless otherwise stated, this email has been sent from Fujitsu Services Limited, from Fujitsu (FTS) Limited, or from Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Limited, together "Fujitsu". This email is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this email has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus-free. Fujitsu Services Limited, registered in England No 96056, registered office 22 Baker Street, London W1U 3BW. Fujitsu (FTS) Limited, registered in England No 03808613, registered office 22 Baker Street, London W1U 3BW. PFU Imaging Solutions Europe Limited, registered in England No 1578652, registered office Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE. Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Limited, registered in England No 2548187, registered office Solihull Parkway, Birmingham Business Park, Birmingham, B37 7YU. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]