It turns out that my interpretation was not correct. I thought it was
possible that I could be incorrect, and that's why I cited the passage
to which I was referring with the url so anyone could double check if
they chose.
As long as we provide the redline for the change from the last 60-Day PR
version, we can do a 15-day PR. We're not restricted to the changes in
the last 15-Day Review. Once this issue is behind us I may suggest to
Mary a slight clarification in the wording of the rule.
Cheers,
Rex
Gary Ham wrote:
> I have no problem, so long as is stays a 15 day review.
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2010, at 11:33 AM, Rex Brooks wrote:
>
>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I expected quite a bit of traffic about this. We'll need at least a few of you to chime in since this goes farther than we spoke about in our meeting yesterday. I think its a good idea, but that's just me.
>>
>> ?
>> Rex
>>
>> Jacob Westfall wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Mary from OASIS has confirmed that the TC can produce a new draft of CAP 1.2 that removes XML Encryption and that will only be subject to a 15 day public review, not a 60. Making this change and conducting this additional public review will further delay the CAP 1.2 standardization process by 1-2 months. On the TC call today there seemed to be widespread agreement on pursuing this course of action.
>>>
>>> The change proposed on the call today was to simply remove the