Re: [cam] Groups - CAM-v1-draft-013.ZIP uploaded

["Monica J. Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com>]

Gnosis_@compuserve.com wrote:

Dave,
A few questions regarding the document update, by section or concept:

    * Section 2.5: Explain what you mean about a test harness.
    * Section 4.1.1: What is a CAM member (is this a registry object
      owner, for example - who manages this)?
    * Section 4.2.1: You have been expanding the CAM efforts/scope and
      now are not only talking about content assembly but business
      process validation. Can we do a check-balance against the charter
      - I see assembly instructions, but not validation. 
    * Section 4.6.1: Will this <choice> construct support some of the
      work coming out of other TC that actually define how references to
      code lists can be maintained (such as UBL)?
    * As I have asked in a previous email., isn't this just a assembly
      mechanism, not the validation of the processes it supports (The
      document should specify the structural processing instructions,
      not the business logic associated with the process validation,
      correct)?  My question is rooted in how this may affect semantic
      interoperability.

Thanks.