The only one that comes to mind is the
leasing duration:
"A resource should be able to
indicate whether and by what duration use of the resource lengthens the
termination time".
It may have questionable real value but it
does help capture common semantics.
Personally, I would question the
non-requirement of not standardizing any factory patterns. Possibly yet another
another WS-Resource* spec.
Regards,
Andre
From: Rich Thompson
[mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com]
Sent: 27 September 2004 19:13
To: wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [wsrp] Fw: WSRF: review
of requirements document
The WSRF TC would like our input as to whether the
referenced requirements document sufficiently captures what WSRP would need in
order to be able to leverage WSRF. If those interested would email their
comments to me, I will consolidate them and forward them to the requirements
author.
Rich
----- Forwarded by Rich
Thompson/Watson/IBM on 09/27/2004 02:08 PM -----
|
"David W. Levine"
<dwl@watson.ibm.com>
09/23/2004 04:24 PM
|
|
To
|
Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, meder@mcs.anl.gov,
lily.liu@webmethods.com, Steve Graham/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS,
bryan.murray@hp.com, David.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com, tuecke@mcs.anl.gov,
vbp@hp.com, Tom Maguire/Hawthorne/IBM@IBMUS, tim_banks@uk.ibm.com,
Jem.Treadwell@hp.com, Latha.Srinivasan@hp.com
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
WSRF: review of requirements document
|
|
You are getting this e-mail as a reminder that we took an action item in this
weeks phone call to ask all the liaisons and document editors to review the
current draft of the requirements document.
The document is available at the TC web site:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/download.php/8884/WSRF_Requirements_0.3a.doc
Please feel free to direct comments back to me, directly, or via the TC-mailing
list, if you want to ensure broader
discussion. I'd prefer to keep the nits/typos/grammar comments off the broader
list, to avoid drowning it in the results
of my poor typing. :-)
Thanks, all,
- David