Re: Revised: Mission Statement

• From: Jon Dart <jdart@tibco.com>
• Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 08:58:35 -0700
• To: public-ws-chor@w3.org
• Message-ID: <3EDE172B.3010200@tibco.com>

Nickolas Kavantzas wrote:
> I also agree with Assaf that the 2 definitions of our mission statement are not bad, just a bit too generic.

I think 1.1b is ok. A mission statement is supposed to be generic. IMO 
it should specify goals, not means.

Re 1.1a: I'm actually ok with the idea (I've generally been in the 
pro-WSDL camp) but IMO it's specifying the means to reach the goal, not 
so much the goal itself.

Perhaps we could pick 1.1b and follow it up with the statement that "It 
is expected that this group's mission will be achieved by specifying one 
or more XML-based languages [or insert better word - descriptive 
systems?] building on the foundation of WSDL 1.2".

--Jon

Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2003 11:58:48 UTC