RE: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014

[Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>]

It's early in the life of the WG so it's hard to tell,
but a number of issues have been raised that may significantly
impact functionality -- e.g. the semantics of AtMostOnce.

All the best, Ashok
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jorgen Thelin [mailto:jthelin@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 11:57 AM
> To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014
> 
> Could you itemize the "significant differences" you envisage?
> 
> Did the input documents to the WS-CAF TC undergo any similar 
> "significant differences" compared to the current versions 
> published by that TC?
> 
> I am just trying to understand Oracle's thoughts and 
> principles on this topic. 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 11:48 AM
> To: Jorgen Thelin; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014
> 
> My conjecture is that the specification produced by the WS-RX 
> WG will have significant differences from the earlier WS-RM 
> specifiaction.
> A new name will prevent confusion.
> 
> All the best, Ashok
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jorgen Thelin [mailto:jthelin@microsoft.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 11:26 AM
> > To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: RE: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014
> > 
> > At least 7 companies are already shipping products implementing the 
> > submitted WS-ReliableMessaging specs, so the current name for this 
> > spec is already well established in customers minds and the market 
> > place at large.
> > 
> > According to MSN Search, there are already 10x more 
> occurrences of the 
> > term WS-RM than for WS-RX. Google produces similar results (modulo 
> > confusion with various similarly named radio stations around the 
> > world).
> > These figures illustrate how established the current name 
> already is 
> > in the industry, and how much of an uphill push it would be 
> to switch 
> > to a new name.
> > 
> > Regarding "possible confusion with [the name of] other documents in 
> > the same space", the name "Reliable Messaging"
> > is already just as different from "Reliability" as 
> "Reliable Exchange" 
> > is. This is like saying "oranges are better than apples 
> when compared 
> > to bananas"! Why make a gratuitous change to something that clearly 
> > isn't broken?
> > 
> > As a comparison, are there any of the specs being produced by the 
> > WS-CAF TC that will be named "WS-CAF". Will Oracle be 
> making a similar 
> > proposal there too?
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:51 AM
> > To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014
> > 
> > The Oracle folks would like to express our preference on issue i014.
> > 
> > We would like the documents to be named WS-RX (Web Services 
> Reliable 
> > Exchange).
> > This aligns the names of the documents with the name of the WG.  It 
> > also removes possible confusion with other documents in the same 
> > space.
> > 
> > All the best, Ashok
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>