[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes Oct 31 - reminder meeting today 11amPT
---------------------------------------- DRAFT MINUTES OASIS WS-BRSP TC Meeting 31 October 2013, 11:00am to noon PDT ---------------------------------------- Scribe: Jacques Durand 0. Call to Order and roll call Jacques Durand calls the meeting to order and welcomes everyone. * Roll call: Ram Jeyaraman Jacques Durand Doug Davis Alessio Soldano Tom Rutt Observer: Tom Link Excused: Gershon Janssen Micah Hainline This meeting is quorate. Agenda adopted. 1. Administrative: min Sept 26. External question about rationale for Intl std if we do. 2. Public Review feedback. Comments review. 3. Test Tools follow-up (donation/upload to open-source projects) Action Items: AI-1: Jacques to do a more precise inventory of test tools AI-2: Ram: will do inventory of Microsoft test tools, and also check current MSFT licensing terms. AI-3: Jacques: to check WS-I licensing with Jamie, does it have any impact, AI-4: Everyone who developed test tools in the past, to check if their company is OK with an OSS style licensing. Minutes: 1. Administrative: min Sept 26. External question about rationale for Intl std if we do. - minutes Sept 26.: approved. - long-term goal: ISO specs, as for 1st batch of WS profiles? - Tom: depends on the market demand. E.g. a need for a clear rationale for WS-addressing use? OASIS standards can stillbe referenced by JTC1. But ISO status is good for government adoption. 2. Public Review feedback. Comments review. - we just got a large list of comments (about 300 total for the 4 profiles). Need to do first a triage (by next meeting): (a) need no action at all, (but need to respond to comment author why) (b) purely editorial, worth doing, (clarifications, typos...) (c) apparently substantial (may be "material" , affect conformance) A major recurring comment (clarification) is: are the Test Assertions normative or not? There is a feeling from TC that we are talking of specifications that have already been extensively tested, with several implementations interoperating. Chair: given end of year winter breaks, shooting for disposing of these in Feb 2014. 3. Test Tools follow-up (donation/upload to open-source projects) Ram: MSFT is OK with open-sourcing tools. It is just that the IP status is still not easy to trace. COntributions may not all be internal. Not even easy to trace who made the tool donation to WS-I (10 years ago). - we will focus next on the comments: specs have priority on tools matters for now. 4. Adjourn Next meeting tentative date: 11/21, 11amPT. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]