Tom,
Rel 119 is closed on the last call. Here are the notes from your
minutes [1]
-------------------------------------------------------
4.4 Rel 119 Sunil new Issue on Callback
for Poll Request
New Issue
<snip>
Sunil moves to accept his proposal and to add the clarification below:
Seconded by
Jishu
Minor open issue to clarify that reply to is not allowed for a poll
and response reply pattern request.
No opposition, accepted.
-----------------------------------------------------
-SK
[1] - http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/5811/MinutesWSRMTC030204.htm
Tom Rutt wrote:
I edited out the open issues for discussion at our meeting tomorrow.
We need to resolve these issues before our spec is complete.
--
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
Issues
which have been closed:
At
redwood f2f wepending
resolved Rel 29, leaving details to rel
92
On
2/10 we resolved: Rel106
with no changes to spe.
On
2/17 we resolved Rel 102
On
2/24 we resolved issues Rel 108, 115, 114,
116
On
3/2we resolvedRel
117, 118 – closed with no changes to spec
Rel
25 – close as requirement issue, spec issue 78 continues.
Rel
103 – close, already stated clearly in section 4.2.4.
Pending
issues: rel 97, 105 are already applied.
Outstanding Specification Issues
|
id
|
Title
|
Status
|
Topic
|
Class
|
Spec
|
Section
|
|
|
|
Active
|
feature
|
Design
|
Spec
|
feature
|
|
|
|
Active
|
feature
|
Design
|
Spec
|
|
|
|
|
Active
|
feature
|
Design
|
Spec
|
|
|
|
|
Active
|
feature
|
Design
|
Spec
|
|
|
|
|
Active
|
meta
|
Design
|
Spec
|
|
|
|
|
Active
|
feature
|
Design
|
Spec
|
|
Other Outstanding Issues
Detailed
List of Issues
|
id
|
Spec
|
Section
|
Topic
|
Class
|
Status
|
Raised By
|
Owner
|
|
|
Spec
|
feature
|
feature
|
Design
|
Active
|
|
|
|
Title:
Non normative WSDL annotations
|
|
Description:
Define non normative WSDL binding of WSRM operations in appendix to specification.
This will allow sender to discover that a recipient supports the WS-Reliability
protocol. Goes a bit deeper than just "I support WS-Reliability" to cover
some granularity such as "I support ordered delivery". Granularity remains
an open question.
Paulo concerned about closing REL-7.
His concern may be addressed through this issue.
6
Jan 2004:
Sunil will resend his rather old (5-6 months old) proposal to the list.
It will only deal with server side annotation showing WSRM support.
10
Feb 2004:
At Oracle request, we will defer consideration of this issue for at least
a week. |
|
Proposal:
15
Jan 2004:
Discussed during this
meeting.
Sunil will provide complete proposal
3
Feb 2004:
Sunil has instantiated Jacques idea of "RM capabilities" in a WSDL extension.
Text about capabilities still not submitted though the WSDL syntax has
been suggested. Both additions are non-normative and may not be necessary
in our specification. Doug asked about this and Jacques somewhat accepted
the point. Jacques intended his text (just now sent to the list but a repetition
of something sent earlier) to provide context for WSDL extension Sunil
proposed. A syntax for general capabilities
does remain in WSDL 2.0, some specifics still up in the air with some opposition
in general as well. Doug suggested words about agreement context for reliable
delivery message exchange with comments about work on syntax for such agreements
continuing elsewhere. Jeff M. would prefer a normative syntax in our specification.
Jacques suggested this syntax be normative iff
agreement (capabilities) is described in WSDL 1.1 (normative but not REQUIRED).
Also discussed whether defining a namespace for this WSDL extension made
it normative, as opposed to simply available for use. Left open for return
to email.
24
Feb 2004:
See email Proposal
to resolve REL-49
Uses a backporting of WSDL 2.0 features
and properties |
|
Resolution:
|
|
|
Spec
|
|
feature
|
Design
|
Active
|
|
|
|
Title:
Meet Realization, R7.4 requirement
|
|
Description:
The Specification must describe the semantics of Reliable Messaging processing
parameters that affect both sides of the protocol.
|
|
Proposal:
|
|
Resolution:
|
|
|
Spec
|
|
feature
|
Design
|
Active
|
|
|
|
Title:
Meet Compatibility, R8.1 requirement
|
|
Description:
The Specification should be usable with other open standard technologies,
if appropriate.
R8.1.1
The Specification shall not preclude the use of Web Service message
attachments. (see also issue REL-10)
R8.1.2
Insure that the Specification is usable in combination with WSS SOAP
Message Security to implement secure reliable messaging. (see also issue
REL-25) |
Proposal:
Attachments split to new issue REL-100
|
|
Resolution:
|
|
|
Spec
|
|
feature
|
Design
|
Active
|
|
|
|
Title:
Meet Realization, R7.5 requirement
|
|
Description:
The Specification must have a conformance section which clarifies what
is required to claim conformance of the specification.
|
|
Proposal:
|
|
Resolution:
|
|
|
Spec
|
|
meta
|
Design
|
Active
|
|
|
|
Title:
Spec and schema conflicts
|
|
Description:
Is the spec or schema normative when they
are in conflict? |
|
Proposal:
|
|
Resolution:
|
|
|
Spec
|
|
feature
|
Design
|
Active
|
|
|
|
Title:
Issue on Callback for Poll Request
|
|
Description:
|
|
|
|
Resolution:
|
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
|