[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
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]