[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-caf] WS-Context Next Steps
I just noticed that we don’t actually have a status section! so how about this (copied from wsdm): Status: This document is a <Editors Draft/CD/Public Review Draft/blah>. Committee members should send comments on this specification to the ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org list. Others should subscribe to and send comments to the ws-caf-comment@lists.oasis-open.org list. To subscribe, send an email message to ws-caf-comment-request@lists.oasis-open.org with the word "subscribe" as the body of the message. For information on whether any patents have been disclosed that may be essential to implementing this specification, and any offers of patent licensing terms, please refer to the Intellectual Property Rights section of the WSDM TC web page (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ws-caf/). The errata document for this specification is maintained at: http:/docs.oasis-open.org/ws-caf/2005/10/ws-context-1.0-errata.pdf >-----Original Message----- >From: Mark Little [mailto:mark.little@arjuna.com] >Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 2:44 PM >To: Martin Chapman >Cc: ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: Re: [ws-caf] WS-Context Next Steps > > >+1 > >Martin Chapman wrote: > >>Having looked at other recent specifications (wsdm, ws-reliability) I >>will propose the following for the errata: >> >>Insert the following paragraph at the end of the Status >section on the >>cover page: >> >>"The errata document for this specification is maintained at: >>http:/docs.oasis-open.org/ws-caf/2005/10/ws-context-1.0-errata.pdf" >> >>Martin. >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Mark Little [mailto:mark.little@arjuna.com] >>>Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:38 PM >>>To: Martin Chapman >>>Cc: ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org; jamie.clark@oasis-open.org >>>Subject: Re: [ws-caf] WS-Context Next Steps >>> >>> >>>Let's do it! >>> >>>Mark. >>> >>> >>>Martin Chapman wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Myself and Jamie had a discussion regarding the Context >>>> >>>> >>>specification. >>> >>> >>>>The WSDL change could be done as an errata, however we have not >>>>described any errata mechanism in our documents. Some TCs >>>> >>>> >>>have created >>> >>> >>>>an errata document (initially empty) >>>>and placed it at a fixed location which is then referenced from the >>>>specification. Since we have not done this link we have no >formal way >>>>to >>>> >>>> >>>record errata. >>> >>> >>>>Another observation is that the Context version that went out >>>> >>>> >>>for public >>> >>> >>>>review was version 0.9.2. We really should rev this to 1.0 so that >>>>the >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>>committee spec, and potentially an OASIS spec, has an >obvious number. >>>> >>>>Given the above, I agreed with Jamie that we would make the >following >>>>changes, subject to group review and approval, and that we will >>>>resubmit Context for public review: >>>> >>>>1. Make the WSDL change >>>>2. Insert in the document a section on errata with a fixed >>>> >>>> >>>url pointing >>> >>> >>>>to an errata document 3. Change the version number (and if >necessary >>>>namespace names) to v 1.0 >>>> >>>>Any comments on the above before instructing the editors to >make the >>>>changes? >>>> >>>>Cheers, >>>> Martin. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>_________________________________________________________________ >>>>Martin Chapman >>>>Consulting Member of Technical Staff >>>>Oracle >>>>P: +353 87 687 6654 >>>>e: martin.chapman@oracle.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]