RE: [wsbpel] CEFACT Liaison Review

[David RR Webber <david@drrw.info>]

Diane,

Thanks for the clarification. Unfortunately on the conference call we all 
referred to the "BPWG", which led to the confusion.

I do believe we need to re-visit this - and so, as you suggest - we do need 
to evaluate this to clarify what the useful purpose is.

I'm not trying to shoot the messenger (Tony!) here.  I can see now the chain 
of events.  I'd much prefer to focus Tony's excellent skills on what we 
really need, now the landscape has become clear.

Thanks, DW.

- Quoting Diane Jordan <drj@us.ibm.com>:

> In the discussions around establishing a liaison, and in the exact wording 
> of the motion, there was no commitment that the Oasis BPEL TC would do 
> anything with or for the CEFACT group.  The liaison is a communication 
> channel.  Any plans to do anything more than keep our group up to date on 
> happenings in the BPWG would need to be reviewed and voted on by the TC. 
>