RE: moving forward with proposals

[Gavenraj Sodhi <GSodhi@access360.com>]

Bill,

Here is the link.

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dsml/200106/msg00000.html

It was originally sent on June 11th.  Attached is the email sent.

"All- 
Attached is Microsoft's Proposal for DSMLv2.0. 
While DSMLv1.0 provides a means for representing directory structural
information as an XML document, this proposal focuses on providing a
method for expressing directory queries and updates (and the results of
these operations) as XML documents. The DSMLv2 proposal is not required
to be a strict superset of DSMLv1. However it is desirable for DSMLv2 to
follow the design of DSMLv1 where possible.

Our motivation of this proposal is to provide a specification which
extends the reach of directories. This includes, but not limited,
enabling a few scenarios such as: 

· A smart cell phone or PDA that needs to access directory information
but does not contain an LDAP client. 
· A program that needs to access a directory through a firewall, but the
firewall is not allowed to pass LDAP protocol traffic because it isn't
capable of auditing such traffic.

· A programmer who is writing an application using XML programming tools
and techniques, and the application needs to access directory data

We're looking forward to hearing comments from you.  Please reply to all
of the people on the CC: line here at Microsoft.

<<DSMLv2.htm>> 
-Pete 

Peter J. Houston 
Group Program Manager, Active Directory 
Microsoft Corporation 
425-703-6768 

DSMLv2.htm"


-Gavenraj



-----Original Message-----
From: Curtin, William
To: 'Tony Gullotta'; DSML (E-mail)
Sent: 6/20/01 6:07 AM
Subject: RE: moving forward with proposals

Tony,

  Sorry, I must have missed the Microsoft proposal. Was it sent to this
list
or is there a URL where I can find it?

	
bill

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Gullotta [mailto:TGullotta@access360.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:29 PM
To: DSML (E-mail)
Subject: moving forward with proposals


We've seen a few proposals from different groups for DSML 2.0 lately.
Microsoft's was the most recent. What are the next steps for getting a
consensus on a direction to take? 

Our group had sent in one, but I would much rather reach a compromise
with someone else's approach at this point to get the standard in place
instead of having a stand-off. Microsoft's was similar enough to ours in
principal that I think we could work with that one. Does anyone else
strongly favor or strongly apose any of these recommendations?

Tony Gullotta
Chief Software Architect
www.access360.com
 
access360
A Better Way to Manage Access Rights