Re: [wsbpel-spec-edit] Regrets for next meeting

["Yaron Y. Goland" <ygoland@bea.com>]

I thought we had a call today at 9:30 am? Did I get confused?

Kartha, Neelakantan wrote:
> 
>  
>  
> I will be out of the country and will not be able to make the next meeting.
>  
> Kartha
> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     *From:* Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com]
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, May 05, 2004 11:26 AM
>     *To:* Prasad Yendluri
>     *Cc:* bpel spec
>     *Subject:* RE: [wsbpel-spec-edit] issues to assign for editorial update
>     *Importance:* High
> 
>     OK so Prasad wants to take 33, 101 and 117.  I will take 25 and 53. 
>     Prasad can go first.
> 
>      
> 
>     It turns out that I have to run for a last minute fire fighting
>     exercise, so I have to cancel out of the meeting today.  My deepest
>     apologies for the lack of notice!
> 
>      
> 
>     * From: * Prasad Yendluri [mailto:pyendluri@webmethods.com]
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, May 05, 2004 8:58 AM
>     *To:* Satish Thatte
>     *Subject:* Re: [wsbpel-spec-edit] issues to assign for editorial update
> 
>      
> 
>     Works for me..
> 
>     Satish Thatte wrote:
> 
>  There is also the resolution of 53 which involves removing Appendix C   
> 
>  and all refs to transaction protocols in the spec.  I will take that one   
> 
>  as well as 25.  You go first.   
> 
>      
> 
>  That should keep this really short!   
> 
>      
> 
>  -----Original Message-----   
> 
>  From: Prasad Yendluri [mailto:pyendluri@webmethods.com]    
> 
>  Sent: Wednesday,  May 05, 2004   7:34 AM    
> 
>  To:  Satish Thatte    
> 
>  Subject: Re: [wsbpel-spec-edit] issues to assign for editorial update   
> 
>      
> 
>   Satish,    
> 
>        
> 
>   To keep the con call short ;) I can take 33 and 101 and if needed 107.     
> 
>   Perhaps Yaron should pick 25?    
> 
>        
> 
>   Regards, Prasad    
> 
>        
> 
>    Satish Thatte     wrote:   
> 
>        
> 
>         
> 
> 
>     
> 
>>  Dear Editors,    
>>
>>       
>>
>>  25, 33, 101 and 117 have been resolved with recommended changes and    
>>
>>          
> 
>   need to be incorporated.    
> 
>         
> 
> 
>     
> 
>>  Peter's list says 11 was also resolved during the last call but I don't    
>>
>>          
> 
>   recall discussing it!    
> 
>         
> 
> 
>     
> 
>>  Let us talk tomorrow.    
>>
>>       
>>
>>  Satish    
>>
>>       
>>
>>          
> 
>   >     
> 
>