Re: [sca-bpel] [Issue 38]: Is the 'MUST' in section 2.1.2 needed?
sca-bpel · April 2009 · 6 messages · back to month
| # | Subject | From | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| 00049 | Re: [sca-bpel] [Issue 38]: Is the 'MUST' in section 2.1.2 needed? | Anish Karmarkar | 2009-04-23 07:24 |
| 00053 | RE: [sca-bpel] [Issue 38]: Is the 'MUST' in section 2.1.2 needed? | Michael Rowley | 2009-04-23 20:44 |
| 00060 | RE: [Issue 38]: Is the 'MUST' in section 2.1.2 needed? | Mike Edwards | 2009-04-27 10:40 |
| 00064 | RE: [sca-bpel] RE: [Issue 38]: Is the 'MUST' in section 2.1.2 needed? | Mike Edwards | 2009-04-28 10:33 |
| 00068 | Re: [sca-bpel] [Issue 38]: Is the 'MUST' in section 2.1.2 needed? | Anish Karmarkar | 2009-04-30 05:55 |
| 00070 | RE: [sca-bpel] [Issue 38]: Is the 'MUST' in section 2.1.2 needed? | Michael Rowley | 2009-04-30 18:18 |