Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Rule: 77 Duration

[Dan Vint <dvint@acord.org>]

Agreed 79 is a duplicate so delete it.

Also is this wording a little weak? If I have a duration I have a duration 
and it should always be represented with the proper BCC. When or why would 
you allow something different?

..dan

At 08:01 AM 7/11/2003 -0500, Lisa-Aeon wrote:
>Rules for Voting:  Each email will have only one rule in it, I will try to
>mark the rules that group with it, or rules that might duplicate it.  The
>membership has 5 working days to bring forth objection or discussion, after
>the 5 working days, if there are no objections, the rule will be assumed to
>be "ACCEPTED" and be given to the LCSC for their implementation.
>
>Please Reply leaving first email in Reply.
>
>Voting period on this rule ends:  July 18, 2003
>
>*******************************
>[R 77]  Duration may be expressed by the BCC Duration.
>
>DUPLICATE OF 79.
>
>Group Rules: 68 - 80
>
>ATG Decision: rule has not yet been discussed by ATG2
>
>
>---
>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.498 / Virus Database: 297 - Release Date: 7/8/2003
>
>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting 
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl-ndrsc/members/leave_workgroup.php