[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: Fwd: RE: [ws-caf] Statement for WS-Transactions workshop
Pete, My apologies to you and everyone else on the list. I should have thought to send an email right after the meeting. There was no formal reaction to our statement. The workshop was set up as a feedback workshop, and the WS-CAF statement was taken in that context. We (Mark Little and I) also proposed a "straw horse" proposal for merging WS-CAF with WS-AT, WS-BA, and WS-C. I understand it's being evaluated. Overall the meeting consisted primarily of presentations on the BEA/IBM/MSFT specifications with some discussion about them that resulted in about a dozen issues being raised. I think it was a good opportunity to let everyone know what's going on in WS-CAF, make the point about common ancestry and technical similarities, and highlight where WS-CAF provides extensions to the BEA/IBM/MSFT specs, especially around generic context management and the business process transaction model. We will have to wait for a more formal reaction. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Pete Wenzel [mailto:pete@seebeyond.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 2:10 PM To: Newcomer, Eric Cc: ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: [ws-caf] Statement for WS-Transactions workshop Eric, are you able to report anything about the workshop, or was it held under nondisclosure? Any response to your proposal? Thanks. --Pete Pete Wenzel <pete@seebeyond.com> Senior Architect, SeeBeyond Standards & Product Strategy +1-626-471-6311 (US-Pacific) Thus spoke James Bryce Clark (jamie.clark@oasis-open.org) on Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 10:36:30PM -0800: > >> --- Below this line is a copy of the message. > >> > >> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 19:24:08 -0800 (PST) > >> From: Eric Newcomer > >> Subject: RE: [ws-caf] Statement for WS-Transactions > >> workshop > >> To: ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org > >> > >> Apologies - I typed this in much earlier today, but > >> our email system has been out since noon, and is > >> apparently still down. So I'm posting from my > >> private account. Eric > >> ------ > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Per today's concall, here is the edited version of the > >> statement I plan to give on behalf of the WS-CAF TC at > >> the Microsoft/IBM/BEA WS-Transactions feedback > >> workshop Wednesday March 10. Please let me know if > >> there are any further comments or suggestions. > >> > >> The WS-CAF TC would like to recognize the common > >> ancestry and technical similarities across the WS-T, > >> WS-C, WS-BA and WS-CAF sets of specifications. During > >> our work we've discovered the benefits of separating > >> out context management as a generic mechanism, and > >> have developed a key additional protocol called the > >> Business Process transaction model. We think the > >> WS-T, WS-C, and WS-BA specifications would benefit > >> from including these major concepts. > >> > >> We propose a discussion on finding the best way to > >> move forward and bring our work together. > >> > >> Thanks - > >> > >> Eric
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]