Re: [wss] More on SOAP version

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

What is your incomplete comment " Cf the "workshops" for WS-RM, etc." ?

Anthony Nadalin | work 512.436.9568 | cell 512.289.4122


|---------+---------------------------->
|         |           Rich Salz        |
|         |           <rsalz@datapower.|
|         |           com>             |
|         |                            |
|         |           10/23/2003 03:24 |
|         |           PM               |
|---------+---------------------------->
  >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |                                                                                                                                              |
  |       To:       WS-Security <wss@lists.oasis-open.org>                                                                                       |
  |       cc:                                                                                                                                    |
  |       Subject:  [wss] More on SOAP version                                                                                                   |
  >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|




I got some off-list email on this which I think is interesting.  With
permission, I'm intermixing his/her comments and mine.

SOAP 1.2 is an official spec with royalty-free rights; SOAP 1.1 has RAND
encumberances (including IBM). While using 1.1 acknowledges the deployed
base (and interop testing), by moving slowly to 1.2 Ws-Security could be
seen as encouraging a non-standards body process.  Cf the "workshops"
for WS-RM, etc. The ultimate path to "no standards body" for specs is
reinforced by not using 1.2.

If WSS were to say respond to W3C by saying "we would like to  adopt
1.2, but cannot do so until DSIG and XML-Enc are Infoset-based without
sacrificing interop of the current methods," that would probably get a
lot of attention over there.

While it might be "fun" to kick the hornet's nest for its own sake, I
think the response suggested above has enough merit that it should be used.
             /r$
--
Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology                           http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway   http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview  http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html


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/wss/members/leave_workgroup.php
.