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>]

Yeah, I'll own 'em.

- g 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:19 PM
> To: Gilbert Pilz; ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of 
> issues for discussion on the 7/28 conf-call
> 
> Yeah that was why I proposed 14 and 16, the others seem to 
> need a little further clarification as the proposals for 15 
> and 17 are lacking in some details to just use them to 
> resolve the issue. I agree they don't seem to be 
> controversial, we should fill in the missing details for the 
> proposals on 15 and 17 on this list and post back to the main one. 
> 
> Any one want to own these? I'll volunteer but I can't look at 
> these in detail until Friday (at least one requires reviwing 
> the Artifact IDs doc). The owner should probably be someone 
> who will edit the docs and I guess that isn't me. Gilbert?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:10 PM
> To: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] FW: [ws-rx] Proposed list of 
> issues for discussion on the 7/28 conf-call
> 
> 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
> > >>
> > >
> > 
>