[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-caf] Issue 7 revisit
In this case, it's a typo fix to get the XML in a consumable state.
Does reviewing the names of port types fall under this or a separate
issue? I think this is something that might be helpful. Mark Little wrote: Doug, I'm happy to re-open the issue (which isn't actually closed yet until I get the updates from Simeon). However, I presume it's down to the TC to agree to re-open it. Mark. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Bunting" <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM> To: <ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 9:32 PM Subject: Re: [ws-caf] Minutes Confcall January 19All, My apologies for missing the call yesterday due to the holiday. Did the group agree to Mark's proposed resolution for issue 7 without modification? That is, are we going with "Respondant"? Agreement on this issue implies the group is not paying attention because "respondant" is not in the dictionaries I have checked, even as a British spelling. "Respondent" seems to be the correct word though its meaning involves a legal nuance (being a defendant) irrelevant to ourusage.thanx, doug On 20-Jan-04 07:01, Guy Pardon wrote:Below are the meetings I recorded. Due to the interference on the line I am not sure if I got everything right. Please send your comments to me if you have any. Guy...Next item: issues resolution Martin: The only way to make progress is by going over issues and resolve them before moving on. Did everyone get a chance to read the issues? Silence. Any motions? Remark: In most cases they appear typos or editorial fixes. Motion to adopt them (issues 1-11) by Greg. Anybody seconding? Yes:Simeon.Any discussions? No. Objections? No. Motion approved. Simeon still has to do an update.... |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]