Re: WebCGM shortnames and timing.

Lofton Henderson wrote:
> At 01:18 PM 1/5/2007 +0100, Thierry Michel wrote:
> 
>> Ian,
>>
>> Sorry to enter late in this discussion
> 
> Yes, the decision was made yesterday, and the request has been sent to 
> the Director.
> 
> I agree that this would have been better done earlier.  However, no one 
> at all spoke out against it.

Yes that is typically the issue. We have issued WD, CR, PR with the 
"webcgm20" short name, as it was agreed by Tim (and the Comm Team). I do 
not understand why the Comm Team did not ask to change it to "webcgm2" 
at that time.

Changing the short name now, breaks the consistency.

> 
> If there is any serious controversy at all about it, we should withdraw 
> the request immediately.  We can live with the old way, and we can live 
> with the new way.  What we cannot live with is any delay whatsoever.  
> The constituents of ASD/S1000D are already in a near critical situation 
> because of our delays.
> 
> This must be resolved immediately, today.  Unfortunately, I will be away 
> from the office for the rest of the day, until late afternoon.  
> Therefore I must leave it to you (staff, the WG, Comm, and the 
> constituents) to decide whether the request is ill-considered and should 
> be rescinded.


I read you have already made the "webcgm2" short name request to Tim.
I can live with this new short name (thought I am not satisfied changing 
  it now just before REC).

Let's say the issue is closed (on my side).

Thierry.

Received on Friday, 5 January 2007 17:27:15 UTC