RE: [ws-rx-editors] wsrmp-1.1-spec-cd-01

["Marc Goodner" <mgoodner@microsoft.com>]

I'm happy with that. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 9:06 PM
To: James Bryce Clark; Marc Goodner; paul@wso2.com
Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org; mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] wsrmp-1.1-spec-cd-01


I think we have to nail down the issue of status text rather quickly
before the links for CD I are published.

How about removing the text that refers to the public comments mailing
list, web form, errata page, etc. I don't see very many issues with the
rest of the status text. Here is the cut-paste of the edited text for
your quick reference. Please chime in and raise your opinion if you are
ok with this text. If there are no concerns, I propose to include this
in the CD I revs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
This document was last revised or approved by the OASIS WS-RX TC on the
above date. The level of approval is also listed above. Check the
current location noted above for possible later revisions of this
document.

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 Technical Committee web page
(www.oasis-open.org/committees/[TC short name] /ipr.php.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------

Thanks,
Sanjay 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Bryce Clark [mailto:jamie.clark@oasis-open.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 16:51 PM
> To: mgoodner@microsoft.com; Patil, Sanjay; paul@wso2.com
> Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org; mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] wsrmp-1.1-spec-cd-01
> 
>      Please keep my colleague Mary McRae in the loop on this 
> feedback, as 
> she is in charge of the templates and (when a spec reaches a 
> higher level 
> of approval) compliance with them.  Copying her here.  I will 
> share my take 
> on these issues with her, and ask her to work them out with the 
> committee.  Regards JBC
> 
> At 12:13 PM 10/28/2005, Marc Goodner wrote:
> >Ive looked into this further and have also determined that 
> the boilerplate 
> >is exceptionally dated. The instructions there are from 
> 2002/3 so can not 
> >possibly reflect current realities at OASIS since the 
> updated process 
> >policy and IPR changes. As a very relevant example, the text 
> and link 
> >regarding comments should only apply to a Public Review 
> Draft according to 
> >the OASIS process, not any CD. The boilerplate is in error 
> and should be 
> >corrected.
> >In the end I believe the TC should follow the intent of the 
> OASIS Process, 
> >instead of incorrect and outdated boilerplate material, and 
> remove these links
> >
> >>From: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com]
> >>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:57 AM
> >>To: Marc Goodner; Paul Fremantle; James Bryce Clark
> >>Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> >>Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] wsrmp-1.1-spec-cd-01
> >>
> >>+1
> >>We should adapt the boiler plate to reflects our realities.
> >>Thanks,
> >>Sanjay
> >>
> >>>From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com]
> >>>Sent: Thursday, Oct 27, 2005 22:13 PM
> >>>To: Paul Fremantle; Patil, Sanjay; James Bryce Clark
> >>>Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> >>>Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] wsrmp-1.1-spec-cd-01
> >>>Importance: High
> >>>
> >>>The boilerplate being used for the cover page of this CD 
> is wrong. There 
> >>>is information there that is inaccurate and in my opinion 
> misleading. It 
> >>>should not be applied on the grounds that it is in the OASIS 
> >>>templates/samples and in other TC CDs.
> >>>The primary problem is the public review link. The TC did 
> not approve 
> >>>this CD for public review. That link simply should not be 
> in this CD.
> >>>I specifically asked if this was a public review and was 
> repeatedly told 
> >>>no. It has been emphasized on our calls that this was not 
> going to be up 
> >>>for public review. Insisting on this link because it is 
> part of the 
> >>>boilerplate seems wrong to me. I dont think any editorial 
> comment about 
> >>>that link not being monitored or the TC not accepting 
> public comment at 
> >>>this time could be strong enough. Why would you give 
> someone the link if 
> >>>they are not supposed to use it? It certainly implies that 
> the TC will 
> >>>be taking comments on this CD at some point in time which 
> is contrary to 
> >>>the direction we were given.
> >>>Furthermore the comment form does not seem like it should 
> be there if 
> >>>the TC has not released a CD for public review yet. 
> Currently the form 
> >>>seems to be active but the links to the archive itself do 
> not function. 
> >>>Who even monitors mail sent to this alias?
> >>>I am less concerned about the errata link. Again though, I 
> just dont 
> >>>understand why we would put boilerplate text with a link 
> to a document 
> >>>we never intend to produce in a CD.
> >>>Look, boilerplate is boilerplate. Why are we insisting on 
> inserting 
> >>>information into our first CD that is wrong because it is 
> part of a 
> >>>template. If it doesnt apply it doesnt apply. Strike it.
> >>>
> >>>Wsrm:
> >>>Remove this text from lines 36 38:
> >>>Others should use the comment form at http://www.oasisopen.
> >>>org/committees/comments/form.php?wg_abbrev=ws-rx. [ed. 
> note - Comments 
> >>>are not being accepted at this time.]
> >>>
> >>>Remove lines 43 45
> >>>If necessary, the errata page for this version of of the 
> specification 
> >>>will be located at
> >>>http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ws-rx/documents/errata
> /1.1/index.html. 
> >>>[ed. note
> >>>There is no errata at this time.]
> >>>
> >>>* * *
> 
>