Re: [ubl-comment] UBL comments on ebXML Core Components TechnicalSpecification v1.8 - move this thread to the correct forum.

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>]

i was playing devil's advocate with my last remark, but i would like to 
stop this discussion (without being too rude).

Firstly, i agree with your remarks, but dont forget the formal process 
is also the way for external groups to respond to the work of eBTWG 
groups.  UBL is a separate constituency from eBTWG CCS and we see this 
comment period as an opportunity to provide formal feedback to the CCTS 
based on our practical experience in using CCTS 1.8 as the basis for our 
XML vocabulary.
.
Secondly, the statements recently posted to this list are not UBL 
'recommendations'.  This has been taken from a draft paper that is still 
being debated within the UBL team (with as much vigour as expressed by 
todd and others on this list).  This misrepresentation needs to be 
clarified.

Thirdly, as mike rawlins has pointed out (but eBTWG CCS members could 
not read) - unless you are subscribed to both lists you do not get all 
the responses and any meaningful debate is lost.  For example, your 
team's responses are not being received by most of the UBL members.  we 
have just spawned two disparate threads and lets face it, why should 
eBTWG CCS be interested in discussing what another group may or may not 
be submitting as comments to the CCTS?  Lets save that discussion until 
we have a clear idea of what we want to say.

I dont think this cross-posting actually does move us along more quickly 
- it just creates noise and confusion..

Lets close this thread down now.  Anyone wishing to contribute to the 
UBL comments on CCTS should do so via the UBL list.  The archive of 
which is publicly available 
at...http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-comment.  Subscription is 
via http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl .



melanie.mccarthy@gm.com wrote:

>I believe a formal process is to either document the conclusions or to
>bring resolution when discussion is not possible to resolve.
>
>But the real reason that we have lists is to expedite the communication
>process and move these discussions along more quickly.
>
>melanie
>
>
>
>
>
>Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au> on 04/30/2002 09:57:25 AM
>
>Please respond to tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au
>
>To:    melanie.mccarthy@gm.com
>cc:    tboyle@rosehill.net, ubl-comment@lists.oasis-open.org,
>       ebtwg-ccs@lists.ebtwg.org
>Subject:    Re: [ubl-comment] UBL comments on ebXML Core Components
>       Technical Specification v1.8
>
>
>Conversely, why have a formal comment process if we can debate all issues
>over the list(s) ;-)
>
>melanie.mccarthy@gm.com wrote:
>
>Tim,
>
>I would rather have more communication than less.  Certainly by  sharing
>this discussion topic it gave others' (potentially me)  time to think about
>it  and potentially pursue  external discussions with participating UBL
>members.  I also always have a choice to delete the message if I am not
>interested.  But to expedite  the development of these technical
>specifications, I prefer to hear am many points of view as possible - a
>believe that one of the opportunities present by list servers, is to
>quickly share communications with a large group of interested readers.  I
>must say that I think this topic will be huge if/when presented as a
>comment to CCTS - so preparation and understand of the originators point of
>view is critical.
>
>My 2 cents!
>regards
>
>melanie mccarthy
>
>
>
>
>
>Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au> on 04/30/2002 07:07:19 AM
>
>Please respond to tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au
>
>To:    Todd Boyle <tboyle@rosehill.net>
>cc:    mike@rawlinsecconsulting.com, ubl-comment@lists.oasis-open.org,
>ebtwg-ccs@lists.ebtwg.org
>Subject:    Re: [ubl-comment] UBL comments on ebXML Core Components
>Technical Specification v1.8
>
>
>Todd,
>
>I must concur with Mike on this.  In fact, I think it is confusing and
>counter-productive for you to redistribute UBL comments to the eBTWG
>lists for discussion.  This is why we have a formal comments submissi
>on
>process.  Groups like UBL need to get their thoughts together and
>present them formally to groups like eBTWG.
>
>UBL welcomes your comments and contribution to our discussion - but
>please dont waste the bandwidth of eBTWG list members.  It only serves
>to add to the static interference.
>
>
>
><remainder of message removed>>
>
>
>
>.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>.
>
>
>
>
>--
>regards
>tim mcgrath
>fremantle  western australia 6160
>phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>.
>

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142