business-transaction message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: New btp draft
- From: "Furniss, Peter" <Peter.Furniss@choreology.com>
- To: <business-transaction@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:18:39 +0100
Title: Message
I have just uploaded
(and you will just have received notification) a new draft of the BTP spec
incorporating all of the issues. I've also updated the issues list to include
the issue resolutions that were discussed and voted in June and July. All issues
are now green.
I haven't yet
applied the effect of ex-10 (adding *-received values to SUPERIOR_STATE,
INFERIOR_STATE) to the state tables - the only effect of this will be to define
when the messages can be sent and received, and I want to run the tester to make
sure I've got the received values right.
We decided in
maint-7 that we would split the xml schemas as separate files. I've updated and
uploaded the btp core schema, but haven't done the qualifiers schema yet. (it's
possible I've duplicated and messed up what Alex did earlier - need to
check)
ex-7 (wsdl friendly
binding0 implies that there is or could be WSDL for the new binding as part of
the document, but I don't think we ever actually said if we would include it,
and if so whether in the body or as an appendix. Alex may be able to provide
something on this front (drafts of the control relationship at least are on the
server) for Tuesday.
I'm off on holiday
(Algarve, Portugal) for the next week and may or may not be able to be on the
call.
Since the only
unapplied changes are the state table and the wsdl, I suggest that this version
is taken as the draft for internal review. I won't be able to apply any changes
next week anyway, so a 2 week review would seem appropriate. Then a short
digestion period and we should have a document ready for CD/public review
(forgotten what the current procedures are)
Due to some quirk of
Word, possibly caused either by the multiple "authors" for the changes (changes
are marked as done by the relevant issue, rather than me) or the use of the
document map, the document is 3.6 Mb and is liable to hog your machines
cpu. I will force it to behave normally as part of the edit after review
(which will certainly lose all the change marking)
Peter
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]