RE: Scope of namespace change policy (was RE: [ws-rx-editors] WDs for 1/5)

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

Sometimes I can't believe how stupid I am. I've been working on the RDDL
files and the following as been staring at me for a couple of days:

"It is the intent of the OASIS WS-RX Technical Committee that the
WS-Reliable Messaging v1.1 namespace URI will not change arbitrarily
with each subsequent revision of the corresponding WSDL or XML Schema
documents but rather change only when a subsequent revision, published
in conjunction with a Committee Specification results in non-backwardly
compatible changes from a previously published Committee Specification."

The RDDL docs and this policy haven't been approved yet. We could either
address the namespace policy scope as a separate issue or bundle it with
the (as yet to be created) issue around accepting the text of the RDDL
docs. I would prefer to do the later and, for now, simply operate as if
the policy will be accepted in its current form.

- g 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 11:56 AM
> To: Gilbert Pilz
> Cc: Marc Goodner; ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: Scope of namespace change policy (was RE: 
> [ws-rx-editors] WDs for 1/5)
> 
> +1 to not applying the policy to WDs.
> 
> The draft policy that Chris send out talks about Committee 
> specs (cannot recall if it was approved). It explicitly says 
> that it does not apply to editors' draft, but is silent on WDs.
> 
> -Anish
> --
> 
> Gilbert Pilz wrote:
> > I don't remember the subject of the scope of the namespace change 
> > policy ever coming up. I had assumed that it applied only 
> to approved 
> > Committee Specifications and OASIS Standards. I can see the 
> case for 
> > applying it to Committee Drafts but I would really have to 
> push back 
> > against the idea of applying it to Working Drafts. It just 
> makes more 
> > work for the editors and working drafts never make any kind 
> of "real" 
> > promises to implementers in the first place (that's why we have 
> > working drafts. I invite the chairs to comment . . .
> > 
> > - g
> > 
> > 
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com]
> >>Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 10:36 AM
> >>To: Marc Goodner
> >>Cc: Gilbert Pilz; ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> >>Subject: Re: [ws-rx-editors] WDs for 1/5
> >>
> >>Marc,
> >>
> >>Some time back Chris/Paul had taken an action to propose a 
> namespace 
> >>change policy [1]. Which I *think* was something along the lines of:
> >>change the NS only if there is a backward incompatible change.
> >>But this applies only to Committee specs.
> >>
> >>I don't recall, if the TC accepted the proposal or not.
> >>
> >>Were there any incompatible changes made? Offhand, I can't think of 
> >>any.
> >>
> >>-Anish
> >>--
> >>
> >>[1]
> >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archi
> >>ves/200509/msg00189.html
> >>
> >>Marc Goodner wrote:
> >>
> >>>Shouldn't the namespace be updated?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >>
> >>>--
> >>>
> >>>*From:* Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com]
> >>>*Sent:* Wednesday, January 04, 2006 10:13 PM
> >>>*To:* ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> >>>*Subject:* [ws-rx-editors] WDs for 1/5
> >>>*Importance:* High
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>Attached are the PDF's for wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-08 and
> >>
> >>wsrmp-1.1-spec-wd-03. 
> >>
> >>>Please give them a look over. If I don't hear from anyone
> >>
> >>before noon
> >>
> >>>tomorrow I will publish them to the main TC pages at that
> >>
> >>time. Sorry
> >>
> >>>for the short review period, but we effectively promised
> >>
> >>the TC they
> >>
> >>>would have something to review by the middle of this week.
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>- g
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>
>