[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: We need to reschedule WS-RM conference call
Tom In the interests of harmony and peace, I suggest postponing the call. How about later the same week? alan ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com> Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:34:48 -0400 To: Doug Bunting <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM> Subject: Re: [Fwd: FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate] > I just realized, that Tuesday July 15 is the date for our WSRM > conference call > from 2:30 to 4:30 Pacific time. > > Tom Rutt > \ > Doug Bunting wrote: > > > Colleen, > > > > If specifications are separated appropriately, separate and > > independent development should be straight-forward. Are you saying > > Microsoft has done a poor job architecting GXA? Composability of the > > results and broad involvement in specification development should not > > be contradictory aims. Besides all that, one of the main enemies of > > interoperability is competitive specifications. > > > > Sun strongly agrees with the points Magdolna and Alan have already > > raised. If WS-ReliableMessaging, unlike at least BPEL4WS and > > WS-Security, cannot be brought forward without the rest of the > > architecture you are developing, fine. Please submit the whole ball > > of wax to this or another standards venue. We believe specifications > > need to be publicly and openly discussed and improved before they are > > designated as standards. > > > > thanx, > > doug > > > > On 07-Jul-03 07:22, Tom Rutt wrote: > > > >> I forward this from Colleen Evans, from Microsoft. > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> Subject: > >> FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- > >> Please Forward as Appropriate > >> From: > >> "Colleen Evans" <coevans@microsoft.com> > >> Date: > >> Sun, 6 Jul 2003 21:18:30 -0700 > >> To: > >> "Tom Rutt" <tom@coastin.com>, "Doug Bunting" <doug.bunting@Sun.com> > >> > >> > >> Hi Tom and Doug, > >> > >> I received a reject from the TC list (only contributing members may > >> post). As I believe Magdolna and Alan are both out of the office, > >> could one of you please forward this to the list? > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Colleen > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> *From:* Colleen Evans > >> *Sent:* Sunday, July 06, 2003 10:08 PM > >> *To:* 'Alan Weissberger'; magdolna.gerendai@nokia.com > >> *Cc:* wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org; Felipe Cabrera > >> *Subject:* RE: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop > >> Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate > >> > >> > >> > >> Magdolna and Alan, > >> > >> > >> > >> We are soliciting technical input that relates to improving technical > >> aspects such as the performance, simplicity, robustness and > >> composability of the WS-ReliableMessaging specification. > >> > >> > >> A core requirement that drives the WS-ReliableMessaging specification > >> is maintaining architectural cohesion within the specification and in > >> relation to other web services specifications (WS-Security, Policy, > >> and so on) and composability with other specifications that describe > >> assurances (e.g. WS-Transactions). It is therefore very hard to > >> proceed on final design of any one particular specification without > >> commensurate progress on the others. Separating this specification’s > >> process from the other Web Services specifications it composes with > >> would harm the goals of composability and architectural coherence. A > >> litmus test for the web services architecture is /bone fide/ > >> interoperability and composability demonstrated between various > >> implementations from several vendors. > >> > >> > >> The authors have organized this workshop to solicit public input and > >> discussion on these specifications while they are early in their > >> development. We believe that specifications need to demonstrate > >> their value before it is appropriate to consider designating them a > >> standard. Successful workshops with community input facilitate > >> reaching the interoperability and composability target needed to > >> assure that these specifications meet their goals. As the > >> specification matures and this extent of interoperability has been > >> demonstrated, the authors will decide on the appropriate relation to > >> standards organizations and/or any other specification efforts. > >> > >> > >> > >> Colleen > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> *From:* Alan Weissberger [mailto:ajwdct@technologist.com] > >> *Sent:* Friday, July 04, 2003 9:27 AM > >> *To:* magdolna.gerendai@nokia.com; Colleen Evans > >> *Cc:* wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org; Felipe Cabrera > >> *Subject:* Re: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop > >> Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate > >> > >> > >> > >> Colleen > >> > >> What standards body are you planning to take your revised spec to? > >> As far as I know, OASIS is the only appropriate standards body for > >> this work. > >> > >> As I mentioned to you today, not only is the WS-RM TC open, but we > >> ARE NOT about to rubber stamp the spec that was brought in to > >> initiate the TC. > >> The WS-RM TC members have spent all our time and efforts on > >> establishing functional requirements. These will be incorporate into > >> the spec (with additions and deletions), as agreed. For example, on > >> last week's telecon we got rid of Message ID, as it was considered to > >> be redundant with Group ID/Sequence number as a unique identifier. > >> > >> At GGF8 in Seattle, I talked to Felipe Cabrera of Microsoft about > >> participating in the WS-RM TC. He was not very receptive and told me > >> to read your spec, as it was clearly superior. > >> > >> My opinion is that competing specs are harmful to the industry. It > >> would be great if the two WS RM'g specs could be consolidated/ merged > >> to incorporate the best features of both. This could take place in > >> the WS-RM TC if Microsoft and the other authors decided to participate. > >> > >> I will attend your workshop on July 15, but will not offer any > >> opinions or suggestions on how Microsoft and other authors should > >> progress the work on Reliable Messaging.. > >> > >> > >> Sincerely > >> > >> > >> > >> alan > >> > >> Alan Weissberger > >> > >> Technical Consultant- NEC > >> 2013 Acacia Ct > >> > >> Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482 > >> > >> 1 408 863 6042 voice > >> > >> 1 408 863 6099 fax > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: > >> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:13:22 +0200 > >> To: > >> Subject: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- > >> Please Forward as Appropriate > >> > >> Hi Colleen, > >> > >> > >> > >> I'm a bit surprised. And have a question based on the quote from the > >> document you sent: > >> > >> " > >> > >> The authors of the Specification intend to submit a revised version > >> of the Specification to a standards body with a commitment to grant a > >> royalty-free license to their necessary patents. We need assurance > >> that your feedback and discussions are consistent with that goal. > >> > >> " > >> > >> Why don't they join to the OASIS WS-RM TC to work on ONE > >> WS-Reliability standard instead of going to standardize another one ? > >> The OASIS WS-RM TC is open. > >> > >> > >> > >> br, > >> > >> Magdolna > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> *From:* ext Colleen Evans [mailto:coevans@microsoft.com] > >> *Sent:* July 03,2003 3:46 > >> *Subject:* WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please > >> Forward as Appropriate > >> > >> The authors of the recently-published WS-ReliableMessaging > >> specification are hosting a 1-day meeting on July 15, 2003, 9am to > >> 5pm, to discuss this specification. This meeting will be held in > >> Building 21, Columbia conference room on the Microsoft campus in > >> Redmond, WA. > >> > >> > >> > >> This is an ad-hoc, open forum for 1) *SPECIFICATION AUTHORS* to share > >> background information on the design of the specifications and to > >> receive feedback and 2) *SOFTWARE VENDORS* to discuss their ideas > >> about the practicality of implementing these and related Web Services > >> specifications. > >> > >> > >> > >> We'd like this to be an open meeting and collect a broad range of > >> ideas. If you are interested in participating in the discussions, > >> please reply to this mail by *EOD 11 July 2003*. Feel free to pass > >> this invitation along to other potential participants, either in your > >> company or elsewhere. > >> > >> > >> > >> Note that in order to attend, the attached legal agreement MUST be > >> signed by each attendee. > >> > >> > >> Thank you and we look forward to seeing you soon. > >> > >> > >> > >> Colleen Evans > >> > >> XML Web Services Standards > >> Microsoft Corporation > >> 303 791-3090 or 425 703-9066 > >> Mobile: 720 480-3919 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting > >> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php > > > > > > > > You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php > > > > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------- > Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com > Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133 > > > > > > You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php > Alan Weissberger 2013 Acacia Ct Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482 1 408 863 6042 voice 1 408 863 6099 fax
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]