Re: [sca-bindings] Recent SCA interest

[Jeff Mischkinsky <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>]

yeah, but if it doesn't CONFORM, i.e. meet ALL the conformance requirements as set out in the spec(s), then its not SCA, it's something that is maybe kind of like SCA --
  I haven't looked at this specific project to know how close it comes to conforming, just making a general comment about the confusion created when someone say they have implemented part of a spec, and somehow that means that there is now an implementation of that spec.

note: i'm just not being pedantic here. If you carefully read the IPR policy, the IPR protections ONLY kick in for implementations of the complete spec(s), as defined by the conformance clauses. An IPR holder is not required to grant licenses/non-asserts to an implementation that does not conform.

-jeff
On Jul 12, 2013, at 11:45 AM, Jim Marino wrote:

> I thought I would share this link about RedHat's SwitchYard project as more evidence that there is interest in SCA:
> 
> http://architects.dzone.com/articles/switchyard-ep-5-application
> 
> Jim
>  

--
Jeff Mischkinsky			          		jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com
Sr. Director, Oracle Fusion Middleware 				+1(650)506-1975
	and Web Services Standards           			500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 2OP9
Oracle								Redwood Shores, CA 94065