Re: [ws-caf] Future of WS-Context

[James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>]

     I am interested in Mark's questions, too.  [1]

     The simplest one to answer is whether WS-CF can go out for public 
review.   It already has.  [2]

     A less simple one is whether it is worth doing work, if one of three 
large US software companies don't front it.  (Or, overlooking Mark's 
choices, any similar list.)   That's for this committee to decide.  It's a 
fine thing for TCs to look up occasionally, and ask, "is this project still 
needed"?   By all means, if a project is a waste of time, it ought to stand 
down.
     But is it?  With apologies to Mark, his criteria may be a bit 
myopic.  It's fairly clear from experience that success and failure in XML 
and SOA are not driven exclusively by large US software 
companies.  Sometimes success absolutely happens because of them.  Other 
times it happens without them.
     The better predictor of success for OASIS output, across our history 
and that of similar orgs, seems to be early adopter pickup by buy-side 
users in genuine production. (As opposed to vendor announcements of 
inclusion in tools -- also a factor, but less of one, I think, for reasons 
we could discuss if you like.)
     In that light -- whether actual users express a demand for WS-CAF or 
its unique functions -- how does WS-CAF look?

     A while ago, I had the impression that WS-CAF was working from a base 
theory close to the old MSFT/IBM proprietary WS-C and WS-T.  So is OASIS 
WS-TX, I gather.  OK, if so, that raises a simple *technical* 
question.  Will WS-TX do everything WS-CAF can?  Or everything that will 
matter to customers?   Is this just a VHS-Betamax thing, with a delta 
uninteresting to users, or is there significant functional 
distinction?   Can anyone point us to recent info, or reasonably articulate 
public conjectures, about this?   Apologies for asking -- I recall some 
earlier chat, such as [3], but not so much recently.   I am sure there is 
some discussion about this, well known to those of you who concentrate on 
the area, that I just haven't readily located.

     Regards  Jamie

~   James Bryce Clark
~   Director, Standards Development, OASIS
~   jamie.clark@oasis-open.org

[1]
At 03:27 AM 4/3/2006, Mark Little wrote:
>I'd like to continue the discussion around the future of WS-CAF and 
>WS-Context. If memory serves, the last time we discussed WS-Context, 
>Martin argued that rather than move to adopt as an OASIS Standard, we 
>should first take the currently agreed specification and do some 
>interoperability testing against it. This is because the last time we did 
>interoperability (Q2 2005?) it was against a much changed version of the 
>specification. I believe we all agreed that this was a good idea but we 
>didn't get commitments for this effort from everyone, so things stalled.
>What I'd like to suggest is that we either agree to do some kind of 
>interoperability workshop (could be purely remote) within the next two 
>months (say a deadline of end of May 2006), or that we simply adopt the 
>current specification as an OASIS standard.
>This then brings me on to the subject of WS-CAF. Firstly, whatever 
>happened to WS-CF? I believe we fulfilled all of the OASIS rules for 
>getting it to a public review. Was it put up for public review? If so, 
>when does that period end?
>Secondly, I'd propose that as soon as WS-Context is adopted as an OASIS 
>standard, we close the TC. Although there is some interest in doing "added 
>value for WS-TX" in the scope of WS-CAF, I don't think there's enough of a 
>critical mass to make it work. I'd personally love to do the work, but 
>without companies such as Oracle, IBM and/or MSFT, I don't think it is 
>worth it.
>Mark.

[2] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200602/msg00015.html

[3] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-caf/200403/msg00030.html