[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [ebxml-jc] FW: [Fwd: Architecture Draft candidate for release toPlenary]
JC members: Have you had the chance yet to review the attached document? There may be some implications for the OASIS ebXML specs. It would be a good things if you could get your comments back to Duane (and CC the rest of the JC) in the next few days. </karl> ================================================================= Karl F. Best OASIS - Director, Technical Operations +1 978.667.5115 x206 karl.best@oasis-open.org http://www.oasis-open.org -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Architecture Draft candidate for release to Plenary Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 09:55:33 -0700 From: Duane Nickull <duane@xmlglobal.com> To: "ebtwg-eba@lists.ebtwg.org" <ebtwg-eba@lists.ebtwg.org> All: The attached document, v 0.50 of the UN/CEFACT ebTWG architecture, has been approved during the last Conference Call to be submitted to this group as a Candidate for Release to the plenary. Please review the instructions, the document and the change log for further clarification. You are being asked to vote on whether or not you believe this document should be submitted to the plenary for a UN/CEFACT Review and comment period. The voting deadline is June 17 and the close of business Pacific Standard Time. If the vote is "YES", this document will be submitted to the UN/CEFACT plenary as a call for comments and general review. In the alternative, this document will be given back to the editors, with comments and instructions to revise before submitting again. General Considerations: 1. Unless you have a strong objection to a very fundamental aspect of this document, please vote yes. All smaller comments and changes can be done during the next review cycle by the plenary. Please do not hold up this document for things like typos, word-smithing etc. 2. If there is a fundamental aspect of this architecture that you disagree with, please document it, including reasons why you disagree and a suggested alternative and submit them to this listserve. Your "NO" vote will be recorded and you MUST attend the next conference call to discuss your positions. 3. I think that we (the team) have doen a great job of getting this document to where it is and we should request comments from a larger audience. I hope that in two weeks we will all be voting yes. If you have some comments and changes, you can enter them at the same time as everybody else during the plenary review cycle. That review cycle lasts for two months. Thank you to all who hae worked so hard on getting this specification to the point it is at. Remember - please read the "PLEASEREADEME.txt" before starting your comments. Thank you all. Duane Nickull -- VP Strategic Relations, Technologies Evangelist XML Global Technologies **************************** ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/
Attachment:
eBTWG_Architecture_v0.50.doc
Description: MS-Word document
Attachment:
ChangeLog_0.49-0.50.xls
Description: application/msexcel
Before voting on whether to release the Architecture v 0.49 specification to the UN/CEFACT Plenary, please consider the following: 1. If your comments are editorial in nature, and not show stopper material, please vote "Yes" and enter your comments at the same time the general plenary comments on the document. 2. If you comments are of typographical nature, please vote "Yes" and enter your comments at the same time the general plenary comments on the document. 3. Only if your comments are of major nature and you feel that the current document does not capture the essence of what the groups has discussed Face to Face, should you vote "No" and elect to internally revise the document once more before it goes to a wider audience. The period for voting, assuming the teleconference call tomorrow votes to call for an internal vote, are as follows: Tuesday June 4, 2002 - voting opens Tuesday June 17, 2002 - voting closes. Please vote either "Yes" - indicating you believe this document should go out to the plenary or "No" indicating that the document still needs more internal revision. If voting "No" please provide a spreadsheet with the line number nd comments on the objectionable content. Please also bear the following in mind: 1. This is NOT an ebXML architecture. This is a superset of the ebXML architecture that can be used for XML and non-XML payloads. 2. We make use of generic terms in normative sections of the document such as "Trading Partner Profile" insted of "CPP". We then suggest the ebXML work in non-normative implemention sections. 3. IF you vote "Yes", you still have 2 - two month periods to enter comments. This is not your last chance to enter comments.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC