last call results - process document
graham.travers at bt.com
graham.travers at bt.com
Thu Dec 18 11:08:30 CET 2003
Melinda,
Nearly right ! 8o)
"...there no working group consensus..." should read "...there WAS no working group consensus"...
Sorry about that !
FWIW, my recollection accords with those of Melinda and Margaret. The suggestions for longer-term improvements were holed below the waterline in Vienna. Nevertheless, I think it would be useful to include them for *information* - to prevent people going over the same ground again in the future. Isn't that what Informationals are for ?
Regards,
Graham Travers
International Standards Manager
BT Exact
e-mail: graham.travers at bt.com
tel: +44(0) 1359 235086
mobile: +44(0) 7808 502536
fax: +44(0) 1359 235087
HWB279, PO Box 200,London, N18 1ZF, UK
BTexact Technologies is a trademark of British Telecommunications plc
Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
Registered in England no. 1800000
This electronic message contains information from British Telecommunications plc which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us by telephone or email (to the numbers or address above) immediately.
-----Original Message-----
From: problem-statement-bounces at alvestrand.no
[mailto:problem-statement-bounces at alvestrand.no]On Behalf Of Melinda
Shore
Sent: 15 December 2003 17:43
To: problem-statement at alvestrand.no
Subject: Re: last call results - process document
The original proposal was to add this:
This Informational memo is being released to record
the history of discussions by the Problem WG in
2003. While there was working group consensus on
the portions of the document describing processes
for short-term and medium term improvements, it
does not represent a set of steps for longer-term
improvements for which there was Working Group
consensus.
which several people felt was unclear (because it is). Here's
a revision which I think is more to the point:
This Informational memo is being released to record
the history of discussions by the Problem WG in
2003. While there was working group consensus on
the portions of the document describing processes
for short-term and medium term improvements, there
no working group consensus on the proposals for longer-
term improvements. Those are included in the document
as a matter of record but must not be regarded as
recommendations from the working group.
Melinda
More information about the Problem-statement
mailing list