Bruce,
I dont think any of the terms I'm proposing to define for this paper are in 
the existing WEDI glossary, but if they are, I agree that we should adhere 
to the established definition.  We may want to propose adding out new terms 
to the WEDI glossary when we are finished, but in either case, I would 
strongly recommend including a "definition of terms" section inside the 
white paper... just for convenience.  Here's my current working list of 
terms that need definitions:
o       EDI Address (including definitions of each hierarchical segment of 
the address?)
o       Interchange Sender
o       Interchange Receiver
o       Interchange Route
o       Transaction Sender
o       Transaction Receiver
o       EDI Server
o       DNS Server
o       MX Record
o       Transport Protocol
o       Authentication Protocol
o       Dial-up Settings (is there a better term for this?  ..."baud", 
parity, flow control)
o       Submitter (I think this term is inherently ambiguous.. so we may 
not need to use it, but it is used in the IG)

-Chris

At 01:01 PM 2/13/02 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>To complicate the issue further, I
>would assume the Routing white paper would use some terms that already
>exist in the WEDI glossary -- and if so are you proposing we "re-define"
>them in a Routing glossary or reference them in the WEDI glossary?  Neither
>option is really desirable if we try to have a WEDI glossary and a Routing
>glossary.

Christopher J. Feahr, OD
http://visiondatastandard.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268        

Reply via email to