[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [opencsa-liaison] Next LSC conf-call?
Dave: Please cover for Policy. I'm not sure I will be able to attend. All the best, Ashok David Booz wrote: > I will be able to attend. > > Dave Booz > STSM, SCA and WebSphere Architecture > Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC > "Distributed objects first, then world hunger" > Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093 > e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com > http://washome.austin.ibm.com/xwiki/bin/view/SCA2Team/WebHome > > > > Bryan > Aupperle/Raleigh/ > IBM@IBMUS To > <opencsa-liaison@lists.oasis-open.o > 05/22/2008 02:08 rg> > PM cc > > Subject > Re: [opencsa-liaison] Next LSC > conf-call? > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be able to attend. > > Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D. > STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect > > Research Triangle Park, NC > +1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508) > Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com. > > > "Patil, Sanjay" > <sanjay.patil@sap.com> > > To > 05/22/2008 12:53 PM <opencsa-liaison@lis > ts.oasis-open.org> > cc > > Subject > [opencsa-liaison] > Next LSC conf-call? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Monday, May 29th is a US holiday and I think we agreed to cancel the LSC > conf-call on that day. > > For the LSC conf call in the following week (on Jun 2nd), some members > had expressed concerns that the meeting time may confect with their > travel plans for attending the SCA Assembly/Policy F2F in Germany. > > I would like to get an idea of who can (not) attend the call on Jun 2nd > (at 8 AM Pacific Time / 5 PM in Germany). I can attend this call as I > would have already reached the hotel by the time of this call. > > -- Sanjay > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com.] >> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 9:46 AM >> To: opencsa-liaison@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: [opencsa-liaison] Minutes of the LSC conf-call on 5/19 >> >> 1. Roll Call >> Simon Nash, Bryan Aupperle, Martin Chapman, Anish Karmarkar, Sanjay >> Patil, Mike Edwards, Jeff Mischkinsky >> >> 2. Scribe Assignment >> Sanjay >> >> 3. Approval of minutes of 5/12/2008 >> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/opencsa-liaison/200805/ms >> g00015.htm >> l >> Approved >> >> 4. Agenda Bashing >> Approved >> >> 5. Issues >> >> a. Namespace for bindings and other extension points >> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/opencsa-liaison/200804/ms >> g00010.htm >> l >> Discussion thread: >> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/opencsa-liaison/200805/ms >> g00009.htm >> l >> Lot of discussion happened but no decisions were made. See >> below for >> the raw chat log. >> >> b. Use of Schematron in SCA Specifications >> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/opencsa-liaison/200804/ms >> g00006.htm >> l >> Discussion on 5/5 conf-call: >> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/opencsa-liaison/200805/ms >> g00013.htm >> l >> Did not discuss due to lack of time >> >> >> 6. Next Call Schedule >> May 29th is US holiday >> Jun 2nd may conflict with travel plans of members for attending SCA >> Assembly/Policy F2F meetings >> Next conf-call schedule to be discussed via email >> >> 7. AOB >> None >> >> >> ----------------------------- >> Raw chat log: >> >> anish: i see the two as orgthogonal >> anish: the two being compatibility and NS >> >> Mike Edwards: These questions alone drive me to favour as few >> namespaces >> as possible >> Mike Edwards: anything else rapidly becomes a nightmare >> >> Martin C: i think last week we said no more then 5 namespaces (ish) >> would be a nightmare >> >> Mike Edwards: > 1 is already a problem >> Mike Edwards: assuming they ever get used together >> >> Martin C: 1 namespace is a problem >> >> Mike Edwards: ;-) >> >> Martin C: for evolution >> >> anish: even if we move in lock step, we'll likely get > 1 namspace and >> will have to deal with it >> >> Martin C: agreed >> >> Mike Edwards: Just look at WSDL & BPEL - very few revisions and even >> they cause problems >> >> anish: sanjay, your proposal is interesting (what to do before 1.1 -- >> keep the same NS regardless of what changes we make, these are interim >> revisions) >> anish: i remember, during the schema 1.1 days, the W3C CR, PR and >> Recommendation had 3 different namespaces and it was a disaster, till >> all the tools moved to the Recommendation >> >> Sanjay: yes, the interim versions would just be >> work-in-progress in that >> approach >> Sanjay: the assumption being that we (OpenCSA MS) finish our work in >> reasonable timeframe >> >> Mike Edwards: Anish - it's that sort of thing that worries me a lot >> Mike Edwards: I really don't know who we are helping here >> >> anish: mike, right, that is why i think sanjay's proposal is promising >> anish: ... we say that interim versions are just that >> >> Sanjay: the early implementors can clarify their support by >> pointing to >> concrete artifacts (e.g. schema files) >> >> anish: ... no change in NS regardless of whether the changes >> in the spec >> are compatible or not >> anish: so, regardless of whether we have fine grained or lock-step, we >> have one namespace for assembly 1.1 through out it's life >> >> Mike Edwards: yes, everything before 1.1 final publication could >> potentially break stuff from month to month (from CD to CD) >> Mike Edwards: it's not nice, but trying to provide this "changing >> namespace" solution is a bigger nightmare >> >> anish: if we move lock-step then one NS for all specs for 1.1. If we >> don't move lock-step then some 3-5 namespaces for 1.1 >> >> Mike Edwards: I think that we should aim to go "final" with 1 >> namespace >> >> anish: so again, i think there are two separate issues: compatibility >> and whether we rev NS for versions before 1.1 and lock-step v. >> fine-grained >> anish: i said before that we make compatibility stmt, i think maybe we >> need to do this only for different final versions (1.1, 1.2, 2.0 ...) >> >> Martin C: im not sure where/why substitution groups got introduced >> >> anish: mike r, i think u are right wrt SG, but I think that >> is a general >> problem with SG and why maybe it is not a good idea to use them >> anish: substitution group's type is a QName not a list of >> QNames, so it >> has to be only one >> >> Sanjay: michaleR: all OpenCSA TCs use the common namespace >> and use fine >> grained namespaces post 1.1 >> >> anish: scdl has a nice ring to it >> >> Sanjay: For elements used in SCDL file, all SCA TCs use the common >> namespace and use fine grained namespaces post 1.1 >> Sanjay: s: MikeEdwards >> >> anish we're not going to have time to finish this >> >> Mike Edwards: we're going to have to table this discussion >> >> Sanjay: amendment by SimonNash: Whenever an incompatible >> change is made >> to the schema, a new rev of namespace is to be generated >> Sanjay: seconded by Martin >> >> Meeting adjourned due to running out of time. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all >> your TCs in OASIS >> at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgr >> oups.php >> >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in > OASIS > at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php. > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS > at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]