This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Talk:ITS Acceptance Factors"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Charliemccay (talk | contribs) |
Charliemccay (talk | contribs) (scope of an ITS) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Tooling requirement == | == Tooling requirement == | ||
I agree that the availability of tooling to support an ITS is crucial -- but think that requiring a beta of the tools to be available before INM accepts the workitem is too high a hurdle - I would suggest that the proposed work item should include a plan that will deliver tooling prior to a specification being brought forwards for ballot | I agree that the availability of tooling to support an ITS is crucial -- but think that requiring a beta of the tools to be available before INM accepts the workitem is too high a hurdle - I would suggest that the proposed work item should include a plan that will deliver tooling prior to a specification being brought forwards for ballot | ||
| + | |||
| + | == scope of an ITS == | ||
| + | |||
| + | The scope of an ITS should not be limited to representing RIM objects "for transmission in messages" -- so I have removed that part of the criteria | ||
Revision as of 14:38, 1 June 2006
Tooling requirement
I agree that the availability of tooling to support an ITS is crucial -- but think that requiring a beta of the tools to be available before INM accepts the workitem is too high a hurdle - I would suggest that the proposed work item should include a plan that will deliver tooling prior to a specification being brought forwards for ballot
scope of an ITS
The scope of an ITS should not be limited to representing RIM objects "for transmission in messages" -- so I have removed that part of the criteria
