Farrukh,
I ask you to please place this as a discussion item on the agenda. This is
not your sole decision to make. This is why we have the resolution
sub-team. The fact is that Kathryn discussed this in several team Reg/Rep
meetings and the comments themselves from Nita indicate specific things in
the V2 Reg/Rep that DO NOT meet their requirements. In my mind, that would
make this a valid V2 comment.
<snip>
We(the ebXML BP Catalog team) had a long conversation last
week with Kathryn about unique identification and what their
scheme should be. We provided her with our requirements for
unique identification that was not satisfied by the current
UUID specification of regrep. The various things that we
touched base upon were:...
</snip>
I agree that this may in fact become a V3 work item but I strongly recommend
that please record the comment and the agreed disposition. I at least ask
that we discuss this in our sub-team.
Thanks,
Joel
-----Original Message-----
From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 10:42 AM
To: 'Oasis RR Comment Resolution'
Subject: Re: [regrep-comresolve] Issue database distribution: 3/15/2002
I should have noted that I did not include Nita's comments at:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/regrep/200202/msg00014.html
because:
-They were not directed to V2 specs
-They were part of ongoing discussions between Registry TC and other TCs
focused on what we need to do for V3.
Please bring to the team's attention any other issues that I might have
missed. Thanks.
--
Regards,
Farrukh
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
