Re: [Fwd: Re: [xcbf] X9.84 Revision]

I'll try to post this to the site later today
of I hear from a majority of XCBF members that
this is the schema we wish to pursue.

But remember that right now the CMS module is
stubbed. It will take some time for me to do
a thorough review to make sure that the type
definitions are correct for our purposes. There
is some simplification we can benefit from and
still be bits on the line compatible with
existing CMS implementations under DER, and
with no flux for XER users.

Phil

Bancroft Scott wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Aug 2002, John Larmouth wrote:
> 
> 
>>OK with me.  Can we get a ZIP of the complete set of modules that
>>Bancroft used for validation put onto the XCBF page?
>>
> 
> Phil sent this on Tuesday.  See the mail:
> 
>    Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 22:37:39 -0400
>    From: Phil Griffin <>
>    To: Bancroft Scott <>
>    Cc: xcbf <>
>    Subject: Re: [xcbf] X9.84 Revision
> 
> Bancroft
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>