ubl — archive

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

From: Jon Bosak
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 00:01:00 -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: [email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 17:04:53 -0700 (PDT)






[[email protected]:]

| 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.

I will put this on the work list as a discussion item for UBL 1.1.

Jon








References:

RE: [ubl] Review of Two Diffs (Michael/Sue's and Stephen's)
From: "Sylvia Webb" <[email protected]>






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

--

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