RE: entstate-651 Notification Description Changes (Part II)

In the RT tool, I only found one issue related to this: 75. There might have
been others, but I filtered on issue title. It doesn't seem to have captured
the previous discussion around consensus. It also doesn't seem to be on the
mailing list. It must have been during a face to face meeting, although I
didn't see it reflected in any meeting minutes either.

So, that might put us in a better position to change it?

Sharon
-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Juergen Schoenwaelder
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 8:12 AM
To: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:5K50:EXCH]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Entmib] entstate-651 Notification Description Changes (Part
II)


On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 07:31:28AM -0500, Sharon Chisholm wrote:
 
> Well, as I said, I can't think of a design pattern to make then 
> conditionally mandatory. Personally, I'd love to see them mandatory, 
> but I think we would need strong consensus to make that change at this 
> point.

What were the arguments against making these mandatory? Generally too hard
to detect such state changes? Something else?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany