[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] CD8
Tom Rutt wrote: I realize now that the edits in cd 8.1 for wsmc and wsrmp have already done what I am asking for. I am happy with the wording in 8.1 as a suitable "abstraction", as outlined in our charter. Tom Rutt > Paul Fremantle wrote: >> Dug >> >> Thanks very much for all your hard work on this. >> >> Anish - what are your thoughts on the CD8.01 proposal outlined below? > This is doing what our charter says "If a referenced standard is not > far enough along on > standards track .... abstract its use" > > With this, all ws policy references should be put in non normative > references section. > > Also, I suggest useingthe wording > > "wsp" is an abstraction pertaining to any ws policy namespace which is > compatible > with the policy assertion types defined in this specification. > > With this abstraction approach, we do not need to wait for ws policy > to complete. > > Tom Rutt >> >> Paul >> >> Doug Davis wrote: >>> >>> All, >>> A new folder called "CD08" has been created in the TC's document >>> section [1]. In there you'll find 3 pdf files that shows the latest >>> version of the specs with the WS-Policy namespace URI fixed: >>> WS-RM: >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/22965/wsrm-1.1-spec-cd-07.pdf >>> >>> WS-RMP: >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/22966/wsrmp-1.1-spec-cd-08.pdf >>> >>> WS-MC: >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/22967/wsmc-1.0-spec-cd-04.pdf >>> >>> >>> and there's also a zip file: >>> ZIP: >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/22964/WSRX%20CD8.zip >>> >>> that contains everything, including 2 *-diff.pdf files showing what >>> was changed from the old CD (for just MC and RMP - RM did not >>> change). The only changes you should see in there are: >>> 1 - increase in the CD version # (on title page and footers) >>> 2 - update to the "previous version" names/URL - needed since we >>> bumped up the CD version # >>> 3 - fix to the WS-Policy namespace URI >>> >>> I encourage everyone to look these over to ensure that not only is >>> the URI correct but also that no other unintended changes were made. >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> Odds are the issue of pointing to the CR version of WS-Policy will >>> come up on today's conf call, so to see if we can move things along >>> there's also a new "CD08.1" folder. In there, again, you'll find 3 >>> pdf files: >>> WS-RM: >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/22969/wsrm-1.1-spec-cd-07.pdf >>> >>> WS-RMP: >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/22970/wsrmp-1.1-spec-cd-08.pdf >>> >>> WS-MC: >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/22971/wsmc-1.0-spec-cd-04.pdf >>> >>> and a zip file: >>> ZIP: >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/22968/WSRX%20CD8.1.zip >>> >>> The files in this folder contain all of the changes mentioned above. >>> However, WS-RMP and WS-MC also contain the following additional >>> changes (which you'll see in the *-diff pdfs): >>> 1 - removed "wsp" from the WS-RMP namespace table (not change needed >>> for WS-MC) >>> 2 - added the following sentence to the "Namespace" section of >>> WS-RMP and WS-MC: >>> The assertions defined within this specification have been designed >>> to work independently of a specific version of WS-Policy and >>> WS-Policy Attachment. Within this specification the use of the >>> namespace prefix "wsp" refers generically to the WS-Policy >>> namespace, not a specific version. >>> 3 - In WS-RMP, moved the references for WS-Policy and >>> WS-PolicyAttachments to be non-normative (no change needed for WS-MC) >>> >>> Note that the WS-Policy/Attachments references themselves still >>> point to the CR versions of the specs. >>> >>> It seems we need to balance our desire to reference the latest >>> version of WS-Policy with our immediate need to also be able to >>> support existing customers. Maybe the above set of changes could >>> allow both camps to squint a little and be able to move on. With >>> these changes our specs clearly push people towards the CR version >>> of WS-Policy but still acknowledges that these assertions we're >>> defining are really independent of any version of WS-Policy. *Note >>> that none of the schema files actually reference WS-Policy at all*. >>> So, given that all of these WS-* specs are supposed to be >>> composible, it seems reasonable to create our assertions (and specs) >>> in such a way that they not only work with the CR version but with >>> any subsequence versions of WS-Policy that the W3C may create. If >>> the WS-Policy WG were to rev the WS-Policy specs it would be a shame >>> to have to update WS-RMP and WS-MC just to update our WS-Policy >>> namespaces/references. (Of course, if WS-Policy were to change in >>> such a way that our assertions themselves needed to be changed to >>> fit into some new framework then we'd have to reopen our specs.) >>> Anyway, please look over this proposal and see what you think.... >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> [1] http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/documents.php >>> >>> thanks >>> -Doug >>> ______________________________________________________ >>> STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group >>> (919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com >> > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]