[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: Fw: [ws-rx-editors] RX nits
Mary If there is a single vote for the various documents, then is it not acceptable for the specs all to be "as if the vote had passed"? If the vote fails we don't post them and therefore it doesn't matter. If the vote passes then they are all consistent. Paul Doug Davis wrote: > > FYI > > thanks > -Doug > ______________________________________________________ > STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group > (919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com > ----- Forwarded by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM on 03/22/2007 01:45 PM ----- > *"Mary McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>* > Sent by: Mary McRae <marypmcrae@gmail.com> > > 03/22/2007 01:39 PM > Please respond to > <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org> > > > > To > Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS > cc > "'Staff-Standards'" <staff-standards@lists.oasis-open.org> > Subject > RE: [ws-rx-editors] RX nits > > > > > > > > > Hi Doug, > > Well, I wouldn't say 'broken'; to the best of my knowledge this hasn't > come up before. There is a similar situation I'm currently facing that's > a bit different but basically can be categorized as the same class of > problem. I have started an internal discussion with a proposed solution; > right now you would not be allowed to change the references. I'm not > overruling that as that could possibly be taken as precedent for any > other number of changes that TCs would like to make post CS vote. I am > hoping that we can reach a resolution over the next few days - it looks > like it'll be at least a week or two before you get to the point where > you'd need authorization to make the change. > > Regards, > > Mary > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com] * > Sent:* Thursday, March 22, 2007 1:26 PM* > To:* mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org* > Subject:* Re: [ws-rx-editors] RX nits > > > Mary - how would you like for us to proceed on this? I could take the > approach of 'do what make sense' since it sounds like the oasis process > is broken. > > thanks > -Doug > ______________________________________________________ > STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group > (919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com > > *Robin Cover <robin@oasis-open.org>* > > 03/22/2007 01:22 PM > > > To > Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS > cc > Robin Cover <robin@oasis-open.org> > Subject > Re: [ws-rx-editors] RX nits > > > > > > > > > > > OK, thanks. > > I understand your problem "What's I'm more worried about > is just the title of the specs... when you go form CD to > CS" > > I think it's a genuine problem in the TC Process. Mary > McRae can provide guidance on what to do in your situation > right now. > > Thanks for raising this to a high level of visibility: I'd > encourage you to put some expression of this (if you have not > already) on ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org so that we can > cite your concern using a public URI. > > Robin > > ----------- > > On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Doug Davis wrote: > > > Actually, I'm not worried about the URIs - for those we point to "latest > > version" URIs and those should not change when we go from CD to CS. > > What's I'm more worried about is just the title of the specs within the > > normative references section. Right now I tihnk we need to refer to our > > own specs as "Drafts" but after the vote they will then be "Specs" so > we'd > > need to update the normative references but I think that violates the > > oasis rules w.r.t. what's allowed to be modified when you go form CD to > > CS. > > > > thanks > > -Doug > > ______________________________________________________ > > STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group > > (919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com > > > > > > > > Robin Cover <robin@oasis-open.org> > > 03/22/2007 01:07 PM > > > > To > > Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS > > cc > > Robin Cover <robin@oasis-open.org> > > Subject > > Re: [ws-rx-editors] RX nits > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the official rules are probably broken. We have some > > Staff conversation underway on this topic, and the related > > matter of which URI to use in a Normative reference -- given > > that you have a choice between "Latest Version" URI and > > "This Version" [version-specific] URI. > > > > Summary: > > > > 1) as things stand (current practice), you are not allowed to > > ballot a spec as a candidate "CS" where you call it "CS" > > on the title page, in running footer (and obviously, not > > in self-reference within References) - the version actually > > balloted must be correct with respect to its pre-ballot > > status > > > > 2) There should be a way to fix the URIs and status for > > cross-referenced (OASIS, same-TC, same ballot) reciprocal > > references in (Informative | Normative) References when > > e.g., an approved balloted CD or PR gains CS status: the > > rules allow for the re-issued spec to make changes in > > the title page and running footer, but NOT in the > > references section. See: [1] below. I think the TC Processs > > needs to be fixed because it's unrealistic and unworkable > > as currently written. > > > > 3) As to the choice of URI, perhaps you can tell me if > > you agree with the following (clipped from a contribution > > I wrote the OASIS Board Process Committee. There > > are several problems relating to use of a "Latest Version:" > > URI as the principal URI because the content is normally > > shifting under that URI. > > > > --------------------------- Clip ----- > > > > Use of "fixed" (version-specific) URIs in references/citations to > > specifications. Use of the "Latest Version URI" in a WD or CD or PR > > or CS creates an anachronism, and in fact an incorrect link > > in that WD/CD/PR/CS document once the target (referenced) document > > is revised to have new content. A reference needs to be made to > > a fixed target -- not a moving target, where the semantic/meaning of the > > assertion in the reference/citation changes as the content at > > the "Latest Version URI" changes. > > > > The application of this rule of interest to me is the specific > > case of OASIS (W3C, WS-I, DCMI, Unicode, etc) specifications which > > use the convention of > > > > a) "This Version URI" along with > > b) "Latest Version URI" > > c) "Previous Version URI" > > > > where "Latest Version URI" is a URI alias which dereferences to > > a sequence of different documents, which change over time, and > > "This Version URI" is a version-specific URI for a fixed resource. > > > > When specification A makes "Normative Reference" (arguably, even > > informative reference) to specification B, the URI for > > specification B should be the "This Version URI", and not the > > "Latest Version URI". > > > > W3C seems to have this practice firmly established in TRs: > > references cite the version-specific URI. If a reference includes > > also a Latest Version URI, the citation explicitly qualifies > > that second URI. Example: > > > > [XML ID] > > xml:id Version 1.0 [http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/], > > J. Marsh, D. Veillard and N. Walsh, Editors. World Wide Web > > Consortium, > > 9 September 2005. This version of the xml:id Version 1.0 > > Recommendation is http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/. > > The latest version of xml:id Version 1.0 is available at > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-id/. > > > > Other examples here: > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/CR-ws-policy-20070228/#Normative-References > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > [1] Changes allowed ONLY in "title page" and "running footer", not > > in the References section. > > > > 2.18 > > "Any change made to a specification requires a new version or revision > > number, except for changes made to the title page and in the running > > footer noting the approval status and date, which must be made after the > > approval of the specification. > > > > 3.4 > > "The specification may not have been changed between its approval as a > > Committee Specification and its submission to OASIS for consideration as > > an OASIS Standard, except for the changes on the title page and running > > footer noting the approval status and date." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Doug Davis wrote: > > > > > Robin - what's the official oasis rules for the last bullet? > > > Aren't the specs supposed to be called CD until they're actually > > approved > > > as CSs? Or can I call them CSs in the normative references section > now? > > > > > > thanks > > > -Doug > > > ______________________________________________________ > > > STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group > > > (919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS > > > 03/22/2007 11:47 AM > > > > > > To > > > ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org > > > cc > > > <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org> > > > Subject > > > [ws-rx-editors] RX nits > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple of things I wanted to mention as I was preparing a draft with > > > Marc's proposal: > > > - I'm updating the dates to be April 5th > > > - I put Marc's text in a slightly different spot than his proposal - as > > I > > > think it makes more sense to have it in the Namespace section to > explain > > > why 'wsp' isn't in the table. Is this ok with people? If so, I'll send > > a > > > note to the RX list with this proposed change. > > > - Robin, a while ago, noticed that the WSRMP spec doesn't have a space > > > between "Reliable" and "Messaging" in the title - while the RM spec > > itself > > > does. Figured I'd add that space. > > > - The references in the specs refer to the RM specs as "Committee > > Drafts". > > > Mary - will it be against OASIS policy to change those to "Committee > > > Specifications" if/when we approve them as CSs? I know it not part of > > the > > > 'approved list' of edits after a CS vote. > > > > > > I've attached the specs to this note so people can review my edits - > > > please look over everything! :-) > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > -Doug > > > ______________________________________________________ > > > STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group > > > (919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com[attachment > > > "wsrmp-1.1-spec-cd-09.doc" deleted by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM] > > [attachment > > > "wsmc-1.0-spec-cd-05.doc" deleted by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM] > [attachment > > > "wsrm-1.1-spec-cd-08.doc" deleted by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM] > > > > > > > -- Paul Fremantle VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle paul@wso2.com (646) 290 8050 "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]