Has anyone proposed a RM'g panel session for Oct 6th OASIS Adoption Forum in Brussels?

["Alan Weissberger" <ajwdct@technologist.com>]

http://www.oasis-open.org/events/adoption_forum/presentation_proposals.php

-THe agenda lists Reliable Messaging as a topic of interest, but I have not heard about any proposal.  Has one been submitted?  Is it now too late/ past submission deadline?  Do we fear another rock throwing/ mud slinging affair with the authors of the competing spec?

-Also, there were some mails indicating are next f2f would be co-located with this Adoption Forum, but nothing was ever scheduled.  Where and when is are next f2f?

Can we please put these two items on the agenda for tomorrow's call

 

Thanks

alan
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Bunting <DOUG.BUNTING@SUN.COM>
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:07:56 -0700
To: wsrm
Subject: [wsrm] What changed in 1.07?

> Well, pretty much everything. The -diff file[1] I provided is not of much
> use since it underscores every space or comma deleted and each mundane
> change to the document. The comparison also groups too many small changes
> together, ruining the headers (at least) and making it difficult to see
> what actually changed.
>
> All outstanding issues were addressed in this revision[2] except the very
> few noted below and in the detailed changes documents[3,4] (should be about
> the same list). The "List of action items" document[3] and related
> "ReplyTo fixes" document[4] describes most of the technical changes made to
> the document. Please note that we editors may have done some word smith ing
> and a touch of rearranging as we addressed these issues; such editing will
> not be reflected in these two[3,4] documents.
>
> By my count, we have 3 main areas of confusion and issues remaining:
> - Response@replyPattern, the subject of my "Technical issues as I go
> through action items..." email [not mentioned in the detailed changes
> documents[3,4]]
>
> - CF4 or group termination in the case of a catastrophic failure
>
> - MP8 or the meaning of the Other Reliability Properties discussed in B.6
>
> At a lower level of detail,
> - the sentence "A property is an assertion or constraint on a specific RM
> capability and its value(s) associated with WSDL elements." near the top
> (2nd sentence) of B3.3 has given the editors pause. Mark's original
> question was "What's associated with WSDL elements here: a property, a
> constraint, an RM capabil ity, or its values?"
>
> - Mark also noted the sentence "For the Callback and Poll RM-Reply
> Patterns, a Response element can contain multiple Acknowledgment and/or RM
> Fault Indications." near the bottom of Section 6. This should be redundant
> with something in Section 4.4 but the closest "something" is in 4.3.2,
> about support for asking questions about multiple groups in a single
> PollRequest. Since Tom seems to be leaning toward removing such
> flexibility, I have done nothing to address this issue.
>
> I would recommend particularly thorough review of the changes I made
> related to AI 1.4 Action 072004-2, resolution to Chris F comments 1, 2, 10,
> 19 and 24 -- this exact set of changes has not been discussed within the TC
> though it follows much discussion.
>
> Some mundane things besides commas include:
> - correcting the 2119 terminology issues I ment ioned earlier
> general rule: when requirement is enforced in schema OK to describe in
> full text that requirement but without RFC 2119 keywords
>
> - removal of some redundancies between the agreement item descriptions or
> abstract model and the element and attribute descriptions in Section 4
> general rule: Check every MUST for redundancy, which may go back to
> overall agreement item descriptions.
> general rule: section 4 needs few MUSTs because most will repeat things
> in section 3 may find a few rules missing from section 3
> general rule: better to express the requirements at a higher level as
> long as that does not lose information and the specific elements are tied
> directly to the abstract requirements
>
> - making the links between those elements and attributes and the agreement
> items or abstract model more explicit
>
> - adding more docume nt automation -- allowing tables, figures and sections
> to reorder and move without further problems. This should have enabled a
> "navigable" document that allowed readers to jump from the ToC and other
> cross-references but I forget the magic incantation to get that working in
> the saved PDF version. References to everything but the examples are live
> in the source document but not the PDF.
>
> - ToC now shows three levels. If you like, the above automation makes it
> easy to change this back to two or up to four or five... Also added a list
> of tables.
>
> - correcting the "element structure" figures (6 and 7) to place the "any"
> at the start
>
> - used more consistent spelling, formatting, phrases and punctuation throughout
>
> - kept all of the examples, tables and figures together (and with their
> captions) on a page -- nothing major should stil l be split between pages.
>
> thanx,
> doug
>
> [1] http://tinyurl.com/6oy89
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/8414/WS-Reliability-2004-08-02-diff.pdf
> [2] http://tinyurl.com/54rjp
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/8413/WS-Reliability-2004-08-02.pdf
> [3] http://tinyurl.com/4ldwa
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/8409/ListOfActionItemsAndStatus-2004-08-02.pdf
> [4] http://tinyurl.com/4hpke
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/8411/ReplyToFixes-2004-08-02.pdf
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>

Alan Weissberger
DCT
2013 Acacia Ct
Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482
1 408 863 6042 voice
1 408 863 6099 fax