Thank you Craig. A few points I would add/modify:
1. The take on I got on the report on the DMTF meeting was that the PWG should do as it thinks best with respect to the content of the alignment changes. The DMTF CIMcore telephone conferences would help with regard to CIM process questions.
2. I suggested that the two major workers on this project (Rick and Ira) consider content and approach of the submission(s) with the view point of a logical and organized presentation of the information the to be updated, not just the "time" they had available. It was agreed that adherence to the original schedule was not as important as providing usable and correct input. Further, definitions of the work products should be made by those most familiar with the details.
3. I do not believe that what is identified as WorkProduct 4 should be on the CIM schedule at this time. The PWG CIM effort should concentrate on aligning the existing printing classes.
4. The PWG will present change requests developed according to a WIMS project schedule intended to provide valid information properly presented.. There will be no specific attempt to "catch" CIM releases. Among other things, The PWG has little control over the CIM process for CRs.
Thanks to all,and best wishes for a happy holiday season. Although the 5 January concall may be difficult to attend, I would appreciate as much participation as possible.
Bill Wagner, Chairman WIMS WG/PWG
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Whittle, Craig" <cwhittle at sharplabs.com>
Minutes from the PWG-CIM Alignment Working Group teleconference call have been posted. See ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/wims/minutes/cim_051212.pdf.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...