W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > June 2002

RE: new version of requirements draft available

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 15:52:45 -0400
To: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF2E42C35E.131DFEE4-ON86256BE2.006CFBE2@rchland.ibm.com>


I updated the doc to reflect all of the resolutions we made during the f2f
captured in the minutes at[1]. If you feel that we agreed to more than what
is captured there, please send specifics to the list. You might also make
that you have the latest draft, and not a cached version. The title/date in
document should be: Editor's Draft 14 June 2002



                      "Cutler, Roger                                                                                                 
                      (RogerCutler)"              To:       Christopher B Ferris/Waltham/IBM@IBMUS, www-ws-arch@w3.org               
                      <RogerCutler@chevron        cc:                                                                                
                      texaco.com>                 Subject:  RE: new version of requirements draft available                          
                      06/24/2002 10:56 AM                                                                                            

I thought that there was a lot more progress, mostly in the sense of
rid of stuff, in D-AC005 (simplicity).  I mention this because I think I
mostly the one defending the items to be turfed.  If you are keeping them
there because you think I am lying down in the road, please go ahead and
pitch them.  I stated my opinion -- if I had gotten a bunch of agreement
that would be one thing, but I did not.  I don't want to impede progress
I don't think that these things are worth spending a lot of time and energy
over.  I think most people more or less agree with the objectives,
the editors.  The issue is whether it is appropriate to state them
explicitly in the document, and I am perfectly willing to go with the
prevalent opinion on this.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 7:42 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: new version of requirements draft available

I've uploaded a new version of the WSAWG Requirements draft at[1] and [2].
It reflects all of the resolutions of the F2F in Paris.



[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/06/wd-wsa-reqs-20020605.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/06/wd-wsa-reqs-20020605.xml
Received on Monday, 24 June 2002 15:54:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:40:57 UTC