[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xri-editors] XRI Primer status question
I am feeding my take back through Mary, but did want to mention that I am delighted to hear how this is progressing. Looking forward to seeing you in April; and perhaps talking about how the methodology potentially could be adapted or applied to OASIS' own rather voluminous and heterogeneous output. regards Jamie ~ James Bryce Clark ~ Director, Standards Development, OASIS ~ jamie.clark@oasis-open.org At 12:08 PM 2/11/2005, Drummond Reed wrote: >Mary, >Thank you very much for the clarification. We discussed this on the XRI >Editor's call this morning and agreed that: a) our intention is for the >XRI 2.0 specifications to be a voting package as a set, with four >documents in the set (XRI Syntax, XRI Resolution, XRI Metadata, and XRI >Primer), and b) we would follow your recommendations below for the XRI >Primer, i.e., approve it as a versioned document as part of the set, but >designate it as non-normative for reference only. > >So now all we need to know is how we should "package" the four documents >in the XRI 2.0 suite. Do we need to add one "master" document that >references the other 4, or can we designate one of the four (preferable >XRI Syntax, since it is the "base" or "core" spec) to be the master. > >If there is another OASIS spec that you feel we should model in this >respect, let us know. > >Best, >=Drummond
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]