RE: [wss] The Web Services Roadmap (Action #6)

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

Hal,

The author names are listed in the document, many of them are on the
WSS-TC, so its easy to find the e-mail addresses. So you can send comments
to the authors as I'm sure they would like to hear your feedback.

Anthony Nadalin | work 512.436.9568 | cell 512.289.4122


|---------+---------------------------->
|         |           Hal Lockhart     |
|         |           <hal.lockhart@ent|
|         |           egrity.com>      |
|         |                            |
|         |           10/02/2002 09:14 |
|         |           AM               |
|---------+---------------------------->
  >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |                                                                                                                                              |
  |       To:       Kelvin Lawrence/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, wss@lists.oasis-open.org                                                                   |
  |       cc:       ckaler@microsoft.org                                                                                                         |
  |       Subject:  RE: [wss] The Web Services Roadmap (Action #6)                                                                               |
  |                                                                                                                                              |
  |                                                                                                                                              |
  >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|



On reason I would like to see the roadmap submitted "somewhere" is that I
would like to publicly comment on it and perhaps see some public discussion
on some of its points. Currently there is not even an email to send
comments to the authors.

Of course, I could publish my own "roadmap" but that seems
counterproductive, as I agree with most of the document, but there are
aspects I would like clarified or seem to me to be ill considered. I have
heard on several occasions for knowledgeable parties that "the Roadmap will
evolve in the future." This make me all the more anxious to see public
comments collected somewhere that the authors might be able to consider
them.

Hal
 -----Original Message-----
 From: Kelvin Lawrence [mailto:klawrenc@us.ibm.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:45 PM
 To: wss@lists.oasis-open.org
 Cc: ckaler@microsoft.org
 Subject: [wss] The Web Services Roadmap (Action #6)


 On the TC call today, I took an action to post an e-mail regarding the
 Roadmap action item (#6 on the actions list). At the F2F meeting on
 September 4th & 5th, the Chairs (Chris and I) took an action to
 investigate having IBM and Microsoft submit the Web Services Security
 Roadmap to the TC as a non-normative document. The status on this action
 is that Chris and I are working with our respective colleagues to
 investigate this. However, at the call today, a question was asked along
 the lines of "why is this necessary and what was the intention to do with
 the Roadmap given our clarified charter specifically states that we will
 not evolve a roadmap". Further, the point was made that the document is
 public on the web and that we do not intend to quote from it directly. It
 was suggested that by having the roadmap submitted we at least had a
 snapshot of the document as it was when the original WS-Security document
 was submitted to th! e TC. It was also mentioned that we reference other
 documents that we do not have "official copies" of in our TC document
 repository. No one on the call today was able to fully clarify what the
 purpose of the Roadmap document once submitted would be.. Therefore, I
 agreed to post this e-mail and ask the TC members to please clarify the
 intended use/purpose of the roadmap once submitted and also to re-assess
 how strong an issue this is. While we (the chairs) are more than happy to
 pursue this action, it would be useful to know that we are spending energy
 on the right issues.

 Let's discuss here and decide if there is a strong enough desire for Chris
 and I to aggressively pursue this.

 Many thanks
 Kelvin