[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: ebxml-jc 2/24/2006: How to Handle Erratas such as for compatibilityupdates
On 13 February 2006, we had an open question on how to handle descriptive or other changes with respect to an errata. Here is the information I received this week from Jamie Clark and relayed to Kathryn how originally asked the process. > mm1 2/22/2006: Kathryn, > I spoke with Jamie today. I believe you can do an errata with > descriptive changes and post it with a URI. Whether you choose at some > point to take that errata and approve it as a Committee Draft is up to > you. Jamie can clarify if I've misinterpreted his point. He said to > look at the WSRM work as an example. They have an OASIS Standard v1.1 > that also has an errata that they approved as a Committee Draft. [1] > Thanks to Jamie for the details today. > > [1] > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/12519/wsrm-ws_reliability-v1.1-errata-cd1.0.sxw > > >>>> .......Jamie and Mary, >>>> Can you advise if such editorial changes as specified here are >>>> considered part of an errata? We ask because they are descriptive >>>> in nature and do not dictate software changes to implement any >>>> given specification. This came up in our last JC meeting. Thanks. >>>> >>>> See: >>>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-jc/email/archives/200601/msg00002.html >>>> [1] >>>> re: Compatibility between ebxml specifications >>>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]