RE: [ws-rx-editors] FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion on the 7/28 conf-call

["Gilbert Pilz" <Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com>]

I have received some minor feedback on a couple of issues, but I don't
know if I could say we have reached consensus. My general feeling is
that people don't really care about these issues, so I think we should
just proceed with the proposals with a few ammendments.

i015: Need "artifactName" values for WS-RM and WS-RM Policy documents. I
sent email to 'oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org' in an attempt
to clarify what this value should look like, but have received no
response. Need to change the "productVersion" value to something that
can indicate minor versions (i.e. "1.0").

i016: Need to change the identifiers to reflect the above change:

wsreliablemessaging-1.0-spec-wd-01.*
wsrmpolicy-1.0-spec-wd-01.*

i017: URL values need to be co-ordinated with Jamie, Scott, et. al.

- g 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:32 PM
> To: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ws-rx-editors] FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues 
> for discussion on the 7/28 conf-call
> 
>  
> I had meant to post it to the editors list ...
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, Jul 26, 2005 23:24 PM
> >To: wsrx
> >Subject: FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion 
> on the 7/28 
> >conf-call
> >
> >
> >I am thinking of scheduling one or more of the issues 14, 
> 15, 16 and 17 
> >for discussion on the 7/28 call. Is there a consensus among 
> the editors 
> >about the resolution of these issues. Any suggestions 
> regarding which 
> >ones are easy targets and which ones require further 
> deliberations by 
> >the editors team?
> >
> >Basically, I am looking for simple issues for scheduling along with 
> >some of the core design issues and wanted to get a feel from 
> you about 
> >which ones are straightforward, etc.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Sanjay
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com]
> >>Sent: Monday, Jul 25, 2005 13:04 PM
> >>To: Patil, Sanjay; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> >>Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion on the 
> >>7/28 conf-call
> >>
> >>Can we also discuss i014 Document names and i016 document 
> identifiers 
> >>to try to get some more of the editorial issues into he 
> pending queue?
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com]
> >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 11:59 AM
> >>To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> >>Subject: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion on the 7/28 
> >>conf-call
> >>
> >>
> >>Here is a proposed list of issues for discussion on the 7/28
> >conf-call.
> >>
> >>- Issue  i013: Max message number in policy
> >> 
> >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php
> >>/13697/Re
> >>liableMessagingIssues.xml#i013
> >>
> >>- Issue (i018): Is an implementation supporting a smaller 
> max message 
> >>number valid?
> >>  See the first issue in the email:
> >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archiv
> >>es/200507
> >>/msg00193.html
> >>
> >>- Issue (i019): Sequence termination on Fault
> >>  See the second issue in the email:
> >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archiv
> >>es/200507
> >>/msg00193.html
> >>
> >>I urge the originators of these issues to come prepared for 
> describing 
> >>on the conf-call the motivating requirements as well as the 
> proposed 
> >>resolution for the issues.
> >>
> >>The three issues (i006, i008 and i009) discussed on the 
> last conf-call
> >>(7/21) are currently waiting for a clear statement of
> >requirements from
> >>their owners. Let us carry the discussion of these issues on the 
> >>mailing list until their requirements are clearly hashed out.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Sanjay
> >>
> >
>