Fwd: RE: [StC BPSS Discussion]

FYI


>X-Apparently-To:  via web80107.mail.yahoo.com; 
>20 Apr 2003 19:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
>X-Originating-IP: [128.103.219.45]
>From: "Tony Fletcher" <>
>To: "UN/CEFACT TMG Business Processes WG" <>
>Cc: "UN/CEFACT TMG Business Processes WG" <>
>Subject: RE: [StC BPSS Discussion]
>Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 03:14:04 +0100
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
>Importance: Normal
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:>
>Reply-To: "UN/CEFACT TMG Business Processes WG" 
><>
>
>Dear Klaus,
>
>Given that I have sat in on and observed quite a few TMG StC meetings
>already, may ask why you need to consult?  Can you point me to the rules of
>procedure that state that Teleconference StC meetings are treated any
>differently from any other form of StC meeting.
>
>I recognise the rules of 'observing' at meetings so will use this
>opportunity to 'say' a few things rather than the meeting.
>
>And whatever the issues might be I do hope they are resolved speedily and
>amicably.  One of the aims of the next release of BPSS was to more fully
>align with ebXML Messaging and CPP/A.  They both produced their version 2's
>quite sometime ago and we need to speed up!
>
>The other aim for this release was just to fix any defects found by
>implementers.  Alignment with UMM (which is still not fully documented) was
>never a goal for what was the 2.0 release (now renumbered to 1.1 I
>understand)
>
>I think Brian (Hayes) had it right. When he was leading the BPSS team during
>the last round of comments he asked all those making comments (which
>included myself) to carefully consider whether the comment really needed to
>be taken into account in the next release (then 2.0) or in a subsequent one
>- 2.x or 3.0.  The 3.0 release was the one targeted as full alignment with
>the UMM as it then was, 2.0 for CPP/A and Messaging alignment issues plus
>implementation fixes (and of course easy, agreed editorials) and 2.x for
>enhancements that were not covered by 2.0 criteria but could be possible
>incorporated before 3.0
>
>Best Regards     Tony
>A M Fletcher
>
>Cohesions 1.0 (TM)
>
>Business transaction management software for application coordination
>
>Choreology Ltd., 13 Austin Friars, London EC2N 2JX     UK
>Tel: +44 (0) 20 76701787   Fax: +44 (0) 20 7670 1785  Mobile: +44 (0) 7801
>948219
>     (Home: )
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: StC BPSS Discussion
>Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 08:16:15 -0700
>From: Klaus-Dieter Naujok <>
>Reply-To: "UN/CEFACT TMG BPSS Editing Team"
><>
>To: "UN/CEFACT TMG BPSS Editing Team" <>
>
>
>
>All,
>
>As a followup to yesterdays request by Jim for a special StC meeting
>regarding the scope, objective and requirements of the work on
>BPSSV1.1, I attached Jim's official request as forwarded to the TMG
>StC. The StC call is scheduled for Tuesday next week.
>
>As mention yesterday, if you have comments you like to pass onto the
>StC before the call, please do so. You can either send a copy of your
>comments to me directly or via THIS the BPSS list.
>
>I have also put before the StC the request to allow "observers" to
>participate on the call. Due to this being  Easter weekend an answer
>will not be available until before Tuesday's call (scheduled for 7am
>Pacific). If the StC agrees to the request I will provide the call-in
>information at that time.
>
>Regards,
>
>Klaus
>
>--
>Klaus-Dieter Naujok                         UN/CEFACT/TMG Chair
>Global e-Business Advisory Council            Principal Advisor
>+1.925.706.2954                           http://www.ge-bac.com
>http://www.klaus.naujok.name OR http://homepage.mac.com/knaujok
>FingerPrint: ED3A 083E 1206 76A4 808E  D0BA 9E6B 8A62 F95D E3CE
>
>
>
>
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to the uncefact-tmg-bpwg listserve.
>To unsubscribe send an email to  with the
>following subject: Unsubscribe uncefact-tmg-bpwg
>If you do not receive confirmation of your unsubscribe request
>please notify  to report the problem.

*************************************
Martin Sachs
standards architect
Cyclone Commerce