----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 2:19
PM
Subject: Re: [ws-caf] Issue 7
revisit
That depends what you mean by reviewing of port
types. If you mean checking them for English/US-English spelling then that's
something that could be done by running them through a spell-checker.
I'm not going to volunteer for that ;-) But it could be a single
issue.
If you mean a wholesale change to names, then
that should be separate issues, as each may need to be argued
differently.
Mark.
----
Mark Little,
Chief Architect,
Transactions,
Arjuna Technologies Ltd.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004
2:12 PM
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 19
All,
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 our
usage.
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.
...