| 00000 |
Groups - Event "IF Weekly Meeting" modified |
Jeff Waters
|
2012-03-06 07:16 |
| 00001 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-21) DE 2.0 No default lists for confidentiality, senderRole, recipientRole? |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-06 18:26 |
| 00002 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-20) DE 2.0 Allow XML Comments |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-06 18:34 |
| 00003 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-19) DE 2.0 It would be helpful to state that it is RECOMMENDED that any sys that can store-and-forward message preserve the element order, and those systems whose primary role is to store-and-forward msg MUST preserve the element order. This would suppor |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-06 18:36 |
| 00004 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-18) DE 2.0 Cleanup of How Defaults are Explained in the Spec |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-06 18:40 |
| 00005 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Issue Comment Edited: (EMFW-21) DE 2.0 No default lists for confidentiality, senderRole, recipientRole? |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-06 18:44 |
| 00006 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Issue Comment Edited: (EMFW-21) DE 2.0 No default lists for confidentiality, senderRole, recipientRole? |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-06 18:44 |
| 00007 |
Groups - DRAFT-03-06-12-Minutes-IF-Subcommittee.odt uploaded |
Jeff Waters
|
2012-03-13 08:38 |
| 00008 |
Groups - Event "IF Weekly Meeting" modified |
Jeff Waters
|
2012-03-13 08:39 |
| 00009 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-21) DE 2.0 No default lists for confidentiality, senderRole, recipientRole? |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-13 17:44 |
| 00010 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-17) DE 2.0 Isuspect the XLink feature will solve the problem about how to tie related content objects &descriptions together, but what we have here as description is both repetitive (almost-the-same paragraph many times in Data Dictionary Comments) & opaque. |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-13 17:49 |
| 00011 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-17) DE 2.0 Isuspect the XLink feature will solve the problem about how to tie related content objects &descriptions together, but what we have here as description is both repetitive (almost-the-same paragraph many times in Data Dictionary Comments) & opaque. |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-13 17:51 |
| 00012 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-16) DE 2.0 The "ct:" namespace is referenced long before it is defined (other than a page 7 ref to "EDXL-CT"). Consider moving some version of the content in section 3.2.10 to the beginning of the Data Dictionary. |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-13 17:55 |
| 00013 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-15) DE 2.0 What's the recommended way for a receiving system to distinguish between DE 1.0 and 2.0 messages, assuming a common input channel? |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-13 17:59 |
| 00014 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-14) DE 2.0 Signing - confirm any ## other is in the correct place for signing and encrypting |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-13 18:04 |
| 00015 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-13) DE 2.0 Signing - any ## other is missing from root element for signing |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-13 18:04 |
| 00016 |
Groups - DRAFT-03-13-12-Minutes-IF-Subcommittee.odt uploaded |
Jeff Waters
|
2012-03-20 09:44 |
| 00017 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Issue Comment Edited: (EMFW-3) DE 2.0 Schema Cleanup Issue- XLink -namespace collision |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-20 16:26 |
| 00018 |
[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMFW-14) DE 2.0 Signing - confirm any ## other is in the correct place for signing and encrypting |
OASIS Issues Tracker
|
2012-03-20 16:30 |
