[Fwd: Re: Two proposals from Tony]

mm2: Reference my comment in today's call.  As another note, Tony's 
proposal may also be affected by Proposal 6 (extends).

>Fletcher2: Dear Monica,
>Drowned in email yet again!  Thank you for this.  We had an inconclusive
>discussion last week - I hope we perhaps conclude this week.  You were
>correct - there was a bit of a Gotcha in include which includes the fact
>that you can not nest package structures not just that you can not have two
>root choreos.  Turns out you have to use Xpath to pull out the bit which
>will fit.  I think folk just wanted the detailed problems put before them.
>  
>
>>Fletcher: Dear Colleagues,
>> Given the current push on getting proposals in at the moment, I would
>>like to (re-)submit the attached two proposals for consideration by 
>>the group.  Comments welcome as usual.
>>    
>>
>mm1: Tony, your proposal regarding the initial choreography touches in 
>part on 1 or more points I made when we discussed import, choreography 
>dependencies and my questions on Issue 687.3 [1].....I think we should establish dependencies, whether we 
>do it in by priority, order, or another mechanism...... Thanks.
>
>[1] 	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2004Oct/0025.html
>	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2004Jul/0015.html
>

Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2004 20:35:45 UTC