RE: [wss-comment] Public Comment

[Anthony Nadalin <drsecure@us.ibm.com>]

Frederick,

Authors seem to handle differently, I disagree about your observation that "they" cannot drive the results of the process, since Nokia has chosen not to participate as an author I don't think they can comment on the process w/o inserting speculation.

I agree that authors of specification take different routes, as the Liberty authors took a different route to submit to a standards body (OASIS) that authors of other specifications have taken and as you say there pros and cons.

I believe that I did answer Oliver's question, the process is documented at the site I have and I indicated that once the process is complete its the authors (collectivity) intention to take the specifications to a standards body, this indicates that WS-Policy has not quite exited the process.

Anthony Nadalin | work 512.838.0085 | cell 512.289.4122
<Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>

<Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>

05/21/2004 10:18 AM

To	Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
cc	<Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, <oliver.wulff@zurich.ch>, <wss-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject	RE: [wss-comment] Public Comment

We should be clear to answer Oliver's question.

The process you reference is different from an open standardization process. For example, feedback from comment session need not be incorporated, and parties participating in these sessions don't have standing similar to voting members of an OASIS TC - they cannot drive the results of the process.

Intention to approve at a standards body is different from developing an open standard in an open forum. This is not to argue that there are tradeoffs and some combination might have value, but we should be clear in answering Oliver's question.

Nobody has yet answered Olivers question regarding WS-Policy.

regards, Frederick
-----Original Message-----
From: ext Anthony Nadalin [mailto:drsecure@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 11:03 AM
To: Marc Hadley
Cc: Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM; oliver.wulff@zurich.ch; wss-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [wss-comment] Public Comment

At the completion of the process documented, its the intention of all the authors that the given specification(s) be taken to the appropriate standards body (lots of factors here that authors voice as part of the feedback sessions). Is there something specific you are hunting for here ?

Anthony Nadalin | work 512.838.0085 | cell 512.289.4122
Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>

Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
Sent by: Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM

05/21/2004 09:51 AM

To	Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc	wss-comment@lists.oasis-open.org, oliver.wulff@zurich.ch
Subject	Re: [wss-comment] Public Comment

On May 21, 2004, at 9:20 AM, Anthony Nadalin wrote:

> Please see the following URL for the process that is used to take
> specifications to a standards body:
>
> http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/offers/WS-Specworkshops/
>

Can you be a bit more specific, there's no mention of standards bodies
on that page at all and I couldn't find anything by following any of
the links on that page either.

Thanks,
Marc.


>
>  WS-Policy defines how the WSDL can be augmented to describe the
> functional assurance. Why is WS-Policy not a spec of OASIS? WS-Policy
> is a common spec which is used in other specs either.
>
>  -Oliver
>
---
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
Web Products, Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.


To unsubscribe from this list, send a post to wss-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org, or visit http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/.