At 08:12 PM 7/9/2002 -0700, Jacques Durand wrote:
Mike:
Great milestone, you have been key to all this !
and thanks to all who gave comments.
I see the following cosmetic remaining changes before we
have something to submit to MS TC (do we all agree here?):
[MIKE] - Thanks also to XML Global for providing the initial test requirements that
we have been massaging :)
- consolidate all these Levels in a single test req document that
ignores the notion of levels, yet keeps the organization of test reqs by spec modules,
only for the sake of ease of browsing.
(levels/profiles would be defined separately, not needed for MS TC submission)
[MIKE] - I agree.
- renumber each test req item (ID) (Matt can help on this he said?
Note: if we use a pure sequential numbering, we should not change them later
as these will be referenced everywhere, and yet we should not expect them to remain
contiguous in the test req doc, as we may have to add/remove some test reqs later based
on feedback.)
[MIKE] - I will leave the "merging/restructuring" of the 3 test requirements documents and
XSL stylesheet to Matt, as he has volunteered to do the resequencing of the test requirements.
- remove from this final copy the "Coverage" attribute (would go to the annotated spec)
[MIKE] - This is a simple stylesheet change, as far as rendering in HTML. However, the "coverage"
attribute is a valuable piece of information we may want to keep in the original XML document...
Is that fine with everyone?
Regards,
jacques
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Kass [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:46 PM
To: Jacques Durand
Cc: ''
Subject: RE: [ebxml-iic-conform] MS Level 2 & 3 test reqs
Jacques and all,
Here are the latest versions of levels 1,2 and 3 ebXML MS Conformance
Testing Requirements.
Incorporated are changes ( and a few not ) based upon comments. Further
modifications based
upon discussion is possible ( but we seem to be iterating to a conclusion :)
I am also attaching comments to Monica's and Jacques comments (
already sent out comments
for Michael Wang's post ).
All my comments begin with [MIKE3]
Regards,
Mike
