Roger,
thanks for putting the notes together. Later during the day yesterday, i came
up with a very simple requirement that i think would cover my concerns
regarding mixing in launch phases in the fee document:
- The Fee Extension MUST provide full functionality with registries
imple
Hello,
On 11/07/2017 20:54, Roger D Carney wrote:
> We moved on to discussing any new issues/concerns, three items were raised:
>
> 1. First of which relates to section 3.8 and specifically what happens
> when a client does not provide a phase/subphase. We spent the
> majority of the me
Alexander,
On 12/07/2017 09:26, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
> Later during the day yesterday, i
> came up with a very simple requirement that i think would cover my
> concerns regarding mixing in launch phases in the fee document:
>
> - The Fee Extension MUST provide full functionality w
We actually request fees for future phases so we can sell pre-registrations
and the like. Removing all references to launch phases would prevent that
ability and make things much more complex and prone to errors.
Thanks,
-Pat
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:41 AM Thomas Corte wrote:
> Alexander,
>
>
