Re: comment on TA specification

Marty:

I can forward this one,  especially since you and I have already
discussed this in our email.

Team:

This comment is a valid concern.  There will be cases with larger
enterprises whereby different divisions of the company may wish to
express their own CPP's.  Accordingly,  this requirement for One CPP per
Company would be prohibitive.  

I vote we take it out as Marty Suggests.

Duane Nickull

Martin W Sachs wrote:
> 
> Klaus,
> 
> Please forward to the TA team.
> 
> Line 513-514:  The TP team collectively does not remember stating a
> requirement of registering only one CPP per trading partner. Please remove
> this requirement.  It is overly restrictive, especially for large
> enterprises, which may need to state various combinations and permutations
> of capabilities for different purposes.
> 
> Regards,
> Marty
> 
> *************************************************************************************
> 
> Martin W. Sachs
> IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
> P. O. B. 704
> Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
> 914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
> Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
> Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
> *************************************************************************************