Re: [ws-tx] PR specifications

[Jeff Mischkinsky <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>]

Is there a concern about the use of a proprietary format that not  
everyone will be able to read, as the authoritative version?
Personally, i think i'd prefer pdf (with sticky line numbers), but  
that is purely a matter of personal taste.

     cheers,
     jeff

On May 06, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Ian Robinson wrote:
>
> The recent ballot to approve the start of a public review of our  
> 1.2 specs concluded successfully.  We are required to submit HTML  
> and PDF as well as editable source (in our case, Word doc) formats  
> of the specs. We are also now required to nominate which one of  
> these formats is authoritative with respect to the others. (This is  
> different from the recent discussion and resolution on precedence  
> or specification and wsdl/schema).
>
> So, as a TC, we need to agree whether to state that the source  
> format (Word) or one of the generated (PDF or HTML) formats is the  
> authoritative format.
> Are there any objections to nominating the source format as the  
> authoritative format?
>
> Please respond with any comments by the end of this week so we can  
> proceed to PR.
>
> Regards,
> Ian Robinson
>
>
>
>
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with  
> number 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire  
> PO6 3AU
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
Jeff Mischkinsky			          		jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com
Director, Oracle Fusion Middleware and Web Services Standards	+1(650) 
506-1975
Consulting Member Technical Staff           			500 Oracle Parkway, M/ 
S 2OP9
Oracle								Redwood Shores, CA 94065