Re: [ws-rx] [NEW ISSUE] MC Action URI is poorly defined

Mary, thanks for reminding us of the process steps. AFAICT, it seems feasible to exhaust these steps on the next conf call.
-sanjay

---------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

Hi everyone,

I’m just jumping in here to make sure everyone understands the next steps. Please remember that these are 3 separate specifications and must therefore be treated individually from this point on.

The most recent status I’m showing is the public review for the 3 specifications ending on 3 May 2008. Here’s the sequence of events:

A. If changes have been made to the spec since the public review announcement

a. The TC must approve the updated document as a Committee Draft

b. The TC must determine whether or not any substantive changes were made to the spec [1]

i. If yes, a change-marked copy of the spec must be prepared and submitted for 15-day member review

ii. If no, the TC may proceed

c. The TC must approve a motion for the TC Administrator to run a Special Majority Ballot (web) to approve the spec as a Committee Specification.

d. The TC must approve a motion for the TC Administrator to run a Special Majority Ballot (web) to submit the newly-approved Committee Specification to the OASIS membership for OASIS Standard vote

B. If there have been no changes to the spec since the public review announcement, skip directly to c. above

Note that the request for c. must include a link to the comment resolution log and meeting minutes indicating both request for CS ballot and certification that there are no substantive changes; request for d. must include links to three organizational members’ statements of use.

Regards,

Mary

[1] "Substantive Change" is a change to a specification that would require a compliant application or implementation to be modified or rewritten in order to remain compliant.

From: Ram Jeyaraman [mailto:Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 5:18 PM
To: Doug Davis
Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] [NEW ISSUE] MC Action URI is poorly defined

I am fine with this change. I suggest we resolve this and proceed to a member vote during the next TC call on Nov 20^th as described in Section 3.4 of the OASIS technical committee process [1]:

“Simultaneously with the approval of a Committee Specification or at a later date, and after three Statements of Use have been presented to the TC, a TC may resolve by Special Majority Vote to submit the Committee Specification to the Membership of OASIS for consideration as an OASIS Standard.”

[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#OASISstandard

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 6:02 AM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx] [NEW ISSUE] MC Action URI is poorly defined

When MC was pulled out of the RM spec it was pretty much a cut-n-paste action. As a result, since the RM ActionURIs are defined by a set of rules rather than defining each ActionURI along with each message (see section 3.3 of the RM spec), the MC ActionURI was never explicitly defined. The wsdl and examples in the MC spec clearly show what the ActionURI is meant to be, but since we're opening up the MC spec to fix other typos I'd like to suggest that we add the following to the MC spec just to be explicit about it:

In section 3.2, right before the exemplar that defines the MC body, add:

When the MC protocol, defined in this specification, is composed with the WS-Addressing specification, the value of the wsa:Action header would be:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702/MakeConnection

While this isn't quite a typo, its pretty obvious and will help new readers. Perhaps we could even discuss it thru email and if there's no objection I can have a draft ready to go for the next meeting - along with the other 2 issues we've resolved.

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com

ws-rx message