Re: [sca-j] ISSUE 122: EJB Binding - Remove references to conversationalfunction - proposal v2 and Call for action

[Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>]

Two very minor ed comments:

1) 3rd para in section 1 (which has only one sentence) can be merged 
with the 5th para (right after the bullets). They belong together.
2) s/Stateful session beans are out of scope in this 
specification/Stateful session beans are out of scope for this 
specification/

One non-ed comment:

1) The table in section 6.1 now says that 'Remove' is a no-op. We don't 
have very many RFC 2119 keywords right now. But if this table is a MUST, 
then support for stateful session beans can't be an extension point.

-Anish
--

David Booz wrote:
> I made some textual updates to section 1 following the comments from the 
> last telecon, rewording the removal of stateful session beans to 'out of 
> scope'. No other updates have been made as no other textual changes have 
> been proposed.
> 
> The sense of the TC was that some time was needed to contemplate the 
> removal of stateful session bean support from the spec. This is your 
> reminder to put your thoughts into email.
> 
> /(See attached file: sca-ejbbinding-1.1-spec-wd-03+issue122_v2.doc)/
> 
> Dave Booz
> STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture
> Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC
> "Distributed objects first, then world hunger"
> Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093
> e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php