[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl-lcsc] [QA Team] Feedback on Methodology Paper
matt is correct that this is now a redundant paper. A shorter and more appropriate version based on our experience with the latest modeling exercise will be part of the 0p70 release documents. Lisa-Aeon wrote: >Marion, >Here is the feedback from Matt on the Methodology paper. Matt brings up >some interesting thoughts. > >I would like to put this on the agenda for the next QA Team Meeting. > >Lisa > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Matthew Gertner" <matthew.gertner@acepoint.cz> >To: "Lisa-Aeon" <lseaburg@aeon-llc.com> >Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 8:54 AM >Subject: QA Feedback > > >Lisa, > >I am attaching a slightly marked up version of Tim's methodology paper. >I made a few editorial changes. In general it was unclear to me who the >intended audience of this document is and what it current stage of >development is. It appeared to me that the entire text is right now only >introduction for some expose to come of the actual UBL methodology. Is >this correct? > >I would almost tend to say that the text is too long and not entirely >focused on the problem at hand. It is an interesting and enlightened >discussion of what is meant my document engineering, but do we need this >as a UBL deliverable? Certainly I would personally be more interested in >understanding the exact structure of the LC SC spreadsheet, what fields >mean what, examples of particularly tricky cases and how they are >solved, reasons why a move to a more database-oriented format is felt >necessary, etc. > >Cheers, >Matt > > -- regards tim mcgrath fremantle western australia 6160 phone: +618 93352228 fax: +618 93352142
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC