OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel-spec-edit message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: action items for editing

As follow up to our conversation at the f2f about how to track the misc editing items we are likely to come up with, I propose to start using the action items on our web site.  If this doesn't work, we'll revert to a spreadsheet but I like the visibility of hte action item list.  
One question to you all - would you prefer that we use hte action item list on the mail tc web page (would allow everyone to add action items as they are found) or the one on the spec editing team page (only this group could add/edit an item)?  
Either way the action items can be visible to the whole group.  
Let me know you're opinion - I'm inclined toward the main page, but not very strongly.  

We can keep track of status according to assignment and due date fields - anyone can open an action item, once an editor's name and date are there, we know someone has taken the pen to fix one.  When we meet we can go through any open ones not yet assigned - if there are concerns/questions we'll leave as is and email the originator, if someone will work on it soon, we'll update the fields, if no one is ready but we agree it should be done as stated, I'll put my name as owner till someone is ready.  
Does this sound reasonable?
I added this one - you can see it on the TC web page as number 5.  

Regards, Diane
IBM  Emerging Internet Software Standards
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123, Fax 845-491-5709

----- Forwarded by Diane Jordan/Raleigh/IBM on 01/26/2006 12:07 PM -----
Ron Ten-Hove <Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM>

01/25/2006 02:02 PM

Ron Ten-Hove <Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM>
Re: [wsbpel] Section G: Minor Nits

Just to capture what was discussed in today's meeting, it was pointed out that SOAP 1.1 is also unneeded as a normative reference. Good luck, editors! Thanks for all your hard work. (Trust me, I know how difficult it is.)

Ron Ten-Hove wrote:

Whilst browsing the latest committee draft of our specification, I happened upon section G, References (Normative). I noted a few errors: I'm pretty sure these aren't worth creating a formal issue for; this email ought to serve to track the problem. Or perhaps this requires discussion?


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]