Correction – there is only one issue
you’ve raised today. I sent this off before I read the second email and realized
I was on the cc line so I got it twice.
Colleen
From: Colleen Evans
[mailto:coevans@microsoft.com]
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005
10:45 AM
To: Andrew Wilkinson3
Cc: ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-tx] NEW Issue:
WS-BA - description of Status is incorrect
Andy,
I just sent an email to the list with the
updates to the template which we discussed Thursday. Could you please add
the following to this issue and the other one you raised today:
1.
A statement at the top
to discourage discussion of the issue until it is assigned a number
2.
A link to the target
document
3.
The PDF line number(s)
Thanks. Apologies that I
didn’t get the revised template out earlier.
Colleen
From: Andrew
Wilkinson3 [mailto:awilkinson@uk.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005
10:05 AM
To: ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: coevans
Subject: [ws-tx] NEW Issue: WS-BA
- description of Status is incorrect
Target document and draft:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/15726/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20wstx-wsba-1.1-spec-wd-01.pdf
Protocol:
BA
Artifact:
spec
Draft:
working draft 1
Section
and line number: 3.1 BusinessAgreementWithParticipantCompletionProtocol lines
213-215 inclusive
Issue
type: editorial
Related
issues: none
Issue
description:
The
description of Status is incorrect. The spec currently describes the receipt of
the Status message as causing the target service to return a QName. My
interpretation of the spec is that, in fact, nothing is returned when a Status
message is received - it is a response to a getStatus message, i.e. Status is
to getStatus what Closed is to Closing.
Issue
details:
n/a
Proposed
resolution:
The
text on lines 213-215 to be replaced to accurately describe Status. I propose:
"Received in response to a getStatus request. The message includes a QName
indicating the state of the Coordinator or Participant to which the request was
sent."
Regards,
Andy Wilkinson
IBM