ubl — archive

RE: [ubl] Review of Two Diffs (Michael/Sue's and Stephen's)

From: Sylvia Webb
To: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 06:22:00 -0000

 MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

















ubl message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: RE: [ubl] Review of Two Diffs (Michael/Sue's and Stephen's)




From: "Sylvia Webb" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>,"'Stephen Green'" <[email protected]>,<[email protected]>,<[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:24:38 -0700






Anne and Stephen,

Both of your messages are excellent examples that emphasize the need for a
structured QA process for the spreadsheets, models, and schema. IMHO, we
need to develop a structured, systematic, repeatable process for review and
QA that reduces differences in the future, and, reduces the amount of time
spent for review and re-review. Other industry groups and standards bodies
that I participate in have found a similar need mandatory, not just an
option. I would like to suggest that the SSC TC form a QA workgroup that
will be responsible for QA of all UBL releases. If such a group is formed, I
will gladly volunteer to participate. 

Regards,
Sylvia