- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:21:16 -0400
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 11:55:13AM -0400, Champion, Mike wrote: > > I just want it to say what we discussed, even though I still disagree > > with it strongly, and would even more strongly disagree with > > the revised > > version. > > Perhaps the best way forward would be for Mark to pay careful attention to > the language in the actual WSA document as it evolves and help us draft > language that reflects the concerns of his "constituency" rather than asking > us to re-hash the requirements document. In the end, it's the WSA spec that > people will pay attention to, not the requirements doc. That's true, it's the architecture document that I'm most concerned about. If it's what we're going to be asking reviewers (read; the TAG 8-) to focus on, then I'd be ok with that. But if we're going to ask the TAG to review the requirements document, then I'd request this clarification be made. Thanks. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Tuesday, 23 July 2002 12:09:12 UTC