Thanks David! I offer 2 bullet points:
- The proposed re-wording of the 2 paragraphs that I sent earlier, that
Anne so nicely offered to propose to the UDDI TC.
- A mechanism that helps us ensure that there is not even a hint that
(or opportunity for a reasonable reader to infer that) ebXML Registry
does not support the registration and maintenance of Web service
descriptions. A formal liaison from our TC to the UDDI TC (if not
already established) could serve this purpose.
Joe
David RR Webber - XML ebusiness wrote:
>
> Anne,
>
> OK - good point.
>
> Maybe we can ask Joe to clarify the results so far - and what
> would be reasonable feedback set of bullet points?
>
> I know he's good at this stuff - so I'm volunteering him!
>
> Thanks, DW.
> =======================================================
> Message text written by "Anne Thomas Manes"
> >
> The whole point of this TN is to support interoperability, not to incite
> disagreement.
>
> Before you start raising motions to the JMT, can we please try to just work
> this out among ourselves? I thought we were having a reasonable
> conversation
> here. I'm trying to understand the issue so that I can take it back to the
> UDDI TC.
> <
