Re: [ws-brsp] BRSP meeting either this Thu 25, or Thu Oct 2 ?

[Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>]

Either is fine with me


thanks
-Doug
________________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.

Jacques Durand ---09/22/2014 06:43:44 PM---All: We planned to have a meeting either this Thu 25, or Thu Oct 2, 11amPT.

From: Jacques Durand <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>
To: "ws-brsp@lists.oasis-open.org" <ws-brsp@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: 09/22/2014 06:43 PM
Subject: [ws-brsp] BRSP meeting either this Thu 25, or Thu Oct  2 ?
Sent by: <ws-brsp@lists.oasis-open.org>

---

All:
 
We planned to have a meeting either this Thu 25, or Thu Oct 2, 11amPT.
Let me know your conflicts if any.                                          
 
Agenda:

-        We have to dispose of the BSP comment we got from the last PR: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-brsp-comment/201409/msg00000.html  (Note that this comment raises a point we have been discussing before. If we follow this comment, that also leads to some significant “material” change on the profile .)
-        Statements of use, for members who have implemented these profiles under WS-I (IBM, MSFT, Oracle, Asynchrony?). See below template statements (the <> have to be replaced, and the right conformance clause has to be selected.)
-        (note: I am trying to localize the WS-I similar statements that were made in the past)

Thanks,
-jacques
 
------------------ Statement of use templates:
 
----------------- for BP1.2: 
 
We, <company> have successfully used the Basic Profile v1.2 
specified by the WS-BRSP TC in the Committee Specification 01:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-brsp/BasicProfile/v1.2/cs01/BasicProfile-v1.2-cs01.pdf 
titled: "Basic Profile v1.2" dated and approved on June 16, 2014. 
 
Our service implementation (INSTANCE conformance target) complied with the 
<"Core" Conformance Clause (2.4.1)> 
< "HTTP transport" Conformance Clause (2.4.2)> 
and underwent interoperability testing with partners, using test assertions in Appendix D.
 
 
----------------- for BP2.0: 
 
We, <company> have successfully used the Basic Profile v2.0 
specified by the WS-BRSP TC in the Committee Specification 01:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-brsp/BasicProfile/v2.0/cs01/BasicProfile-v2.0-cs01.pdf 
titled: "Basic Profile v2.0" dated and approved on June 16, 2014. 
 
Our service implementation (INSTANCE conformance target) complied with the 
<"Core" Conformance Clause (2.4.1)> 
< "HTTP transport" Conformance Clause (2.4.2)> 
and underwent interoperability testing with partners, using test assertions in Appendix D.
 
 
----------------- for RSP1.0: 
 
We, <company> have successfully used the Reliable Secure Profile Version 1.0
specified by the WS-BRSP TC in the Committee Specification 01:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-brsp/ReliableSecureProfile/v1.0/cs01/ReliableSecureProfile-v1.0-cs01.pdf 
titled: "Reliable Secure Profile Version 1.0" dated and approved on June 16, 2014. 
 
Our service implementation (INSTANCE conformance target) complied with the 
<"Core" Conformance Clause based on BP1.2 (2.4.1)> 
<"HTTP transport" Conformance Clause based on BP1.2 (2.4.2)> 
<"Core" Conformance Clause based on BP2.0 (2.4.3)> 
<"HTTP transport" Conformance Clause based on BP2.0 (2.4.4)> 
 
and underwent interoperability testing with partners, using test assertions in Appendix D.