[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion on the 7/28 conf-call
Yeah, I'll own 'em. - g > -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:19 PM > To: Gilbert Pilz; ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of > issues for discussion on the 7/28 conf-call > > Yeah that was why I proposed 14 and 16, the others seem to > need a little further clarification as the proposals for 15 > and 17 are lacking in some details to just use them to > resolve the issue. I agree they don't seem to be > controversial, we should fill in the missing details for the > proposals on 15 and 17 on this list and post back to the main one. > > Any one want to own these? I'll volunteer but I can't look at > these in detail until Friday (at least one requires reviwing > the Artifact IDs doc). The owner should probably be someone > who will edit the docs and I guess that isn't me. Gilbert? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:10 PM > To: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of > issues for discussion on the 7/28 conf-call > > I have received some minor feedback on a couple of issues, > but I don't know if I could say we have reached consensus. My > general feeling is that people don't really care about these > issues, so I think we should just proceed with the proposals > with a few ammendments. > > i015: Need "artifactName" values for WS-RM and WS-RM Policy > documents. I sent email to > 'oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org' in an attempt to > clarify what this value should look like, but have received > no response. Need to change the "productVersion" value to > something that can indicate minor versions (i.e. "1.0"). > > i016: Need to change the identifiers to reflect the above change: > > wsreliablemessaging-1.0-spec-wd-01.* > wsrmpolicy-1.0-spec-wd-01.* > > i017: URL values need to be co-ordinated with Jamie, Scott, et. al. > > - g > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:32 PM > > To: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: [ws-rx-editors] FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for > > discussion on the 7/28 conf-call > > > > > > I had meant to post it to the editors list ... > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com] > > >Sent: Tuesday, Jul 26, 2005 23:24 PM > > >To: wsrx > > >Subject: FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion > > on the 7/28 > > >conf-call > > > > > > > > >I am thinking of scheduling one or more of the issues 14, > > 15, 16 and 17 > > >for discussion on the 7/28 call. Is there a consensus among > > the editors > > >about the resolution of these issues. Any suggestions > > regarding which > > >ones are easy targets and which ones require further > > deliberations by > > >the editors team? > > > > > >Basically, I am looking for simple issues for scheduling > along with > > >some of the core design issues and wanted to get a feel from > > you about > > >which ones are straightforward, etc. > > > > > >Thanks, > > >Sanjay > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] > > >>Sent: Monday, Jul 25, 2005 13:04 PM > > >>To: Patil, Sanjay; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > > >>Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion on the > > >>7/28 conf-call > > >> > > >>Can we also discuss i014 Document names and i016 document > > identifiers > > >>to try to get some more of the editorial issues into he > > pending queue? > > >> > > >>-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com] > > >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 11:59 AM > > >>To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > > >>Subject: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion > on the 7/28 > > >>conf-call > > >> > > >> > > >>Here is a proposed list of issues for discussion on the 7/28 > > >conf-call. > > >> > > >>- Issue i013: Max message number in policy > > >> > > >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php > > >>/13697/Re > > >>liableMessagingIssues.xml#i013 > > >> > > >>- Issue (i018): Is an implementation supporting a smaller > > max message > > >>number valid? > > >> See the first issue in the email: > > >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archiv > > >>es/200507 > > >>/msg00193.html > > >> > > >>- Issue (i019): Sequence termination on Fault > > >> See the second issue in the email: > > >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archiv > > >>es/200507 > > >>/msg00193.html > > >> > > >>I urge the originators of these issues to come prepared for > > describing > > >>on the conf-call the motivating requirements as well as the > > proposed > > >>resolution for the issues. > > >> > > >>The three issues (i006, i008 and i009) discussed on the > > last conf-call > > >>(7/21) are currently waiting for a clear statement of > > >requirements from > > >>their owners. Let us carry the discussion of these issues on the > > >>mailing list until their requirements are clearly hashed out. > > >> > > >>Thanks, > > >>Sanjay > > >> > > > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]