Some binding issues applied but not marked as such?

[Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>]

FYI, JIRA currently shows the following issues as applied:

Key	Summary	Status	Created	Updated
BINDINGS-35	Allow topics anywhere that queues can be used	Applied	09/Apr/08	01/Aug/08
BINDINGS-34	Clarify default function selection and data binding behavior	Applied	09/Apr/08	01/Aug/08
BINDINGS-33	Correlation property names are odd, and the space of options is not extensible.	Applied	09/Apr/08	01/Aug/08
BINDINGS-26	JMS binding pseudo-schemas inconsistent with assembly	Applied	14/Mar/08	28/Apr/08
BINDINGS-20	JMS binding URI should follow JMS IRI scheme submitted to IETF	Applied	03/Dec/07	01/Aug/08
BINDINGS-18	Clarify the rules on which queues are used for responses and callbacks	Applied	26/Nov/07	28/Apr/08
BINDINGS-17	Rules for Binding compatibility	Applied	19/Nov/07	02/Apr/08
BINDINGS-16	binding.ws reference to assembly spec for interface mapping is incorrect	Applied	13/Nov/07	02/Apr/08
BINDINGS-12	Are JMS message selectors supported?	Applied	25/Oct/07	28/Apr/08
BINDINGS-10	Rules for WSDL generation create invalid WSDL by using "/" where it is not allowed.	Applied	16/Oct/07	02/Apr/08
BINDINGS-9	Use of wsdli:wsdlLocation does not match WSDL 2.0 specification	Applied	11/Oct/07	02/Apr/08
BINDINGS-8	No bindingType for binding.ws	Applied	05/Oct/07	02/Apr/08
BINDINGS-6	JMS bindingType and conversation intent	Applied	05/Oct/07	28/Apr/08
BINDINGS-5	JMS bindingType and atLeastOne intent overlaps with setting JMSDeliveryMode	Applied	05/Oct/07	28/Apr/08
BINDINGS-3	portType referred to inconsistently throughout specification	Applied	01/Oct/07	02/Apr/08
BINDINGS-1	JMSDeliveryMode, JMSTimeToLive and JMSPriority defined as types different from what the JMS specification uses.	Applied	01/Oct/07	28/Apr/08

Based on the notes in the margins it appears that, at least for the jmsbinding spec, there may be some issues applied that have not been marked as such.  #13, #38, for example.  Can the editors clarify?  I think, from what I see later in the editing notes, that the issues in question may apply to multiple specs, and thus are only partially applied.

This raises a question for the committee drafts.  Presumably we're accepting the CD "as-is", but for the JMS spec the issues will be considered unapplied, even though they have been?

-Eric.


-Eric.