I agree, though for a slightly different reason, and it is the same
reason why we should keep WSIA in every term which is specific to the
work of this commitee so that it is clear when the time comes to
write the spec. I might even suggest hyphenating these terms for
later ease if they get further taken up into coding.
Ciao,
Rex
At 10:45 AM -0500 2/27/02, Angel Luis Diaz wrote:
>I would keep it "WSIA Intermediaries" since we are focused on the
>experience.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Angel
>
>Angel Luis Diaz, Ph.D
>Senior Manager, Next Generation eXperience Frameworks
>IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
>aldiaz@us.ibm.com
>(914) 784-7388 / (914) 441-7594
>
>
>"Jeffery C. Broberg" <jbroberg@silverstream.com> on 02/27/2002 10:33:37 AM
>
>To: Angel Luis Diaz/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
>cc: <wsia@lists.oasis-open.org>
>Subject: RE: [wsia] [wsia-glossary] - Entry added
>
>
>
>Should it be specific to WSIA or maybe just WS ? Would that cover the
>machine-machine scenario better ?
>
>