Fw: [ws-rx] What spec versions should be referenced by the RDDL documents?

[Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>]

The first two issues are kind of interesting.
Does anyone know how the use of RDDL is supposed to work when the docs
change over time but their namespaces don't? How are we supposed to allow
people to easily reference a particular version of the specs when multiple
versions use the same namespace?  
Whose idea was it to use RDDL anyway?
:-)

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 05/06/2008 07:55 AM -----

Peter Niblett <peter_niblett@uk.ibm.com>

05/02/2008 05:37 AM

To	ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
cc
Subject	[ws-rx] What spec versions should be referenced by the RDDL documents?

While I was doing Action Item 0143 I took a look at the RDDL documents
at 

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702 
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrmp/200702 
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702 

and spotted a number of things that look like problems to me..

1. They have all been updated to talk about and point to the CD 01 of the
latest versions of the specs (1.2 in the case of RM and RMP, and 1.1 in
the case of MC). However since the namespace hasn't changed, this means
that we no longer have RDDL documents associated with these namespace that
point to the approved OASIS standard specifications.  Would it not
be more appropriate to keep the RDDL documents pointing at the current
standard until we have standard versions of the new specifications?  Apologies
if the TC has already discussed this, and decided to make this update to
the RDDL documents. 

This is particularly noticeable, because the TC home pages (both members
and public) contain links which claim to be for the standard versions of
the specs, but actually take you to these RDDL documents which point to
the new CDs. 

2. The documents do try and contain a pointer to the previous versions.
However they try to this by including a pointer in the "Related Namespace"
section. Since the namespace hasn't changed, this turns out to be a self-referencing
link. 

For example the last line of  the RM RDDL at http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702
is " Previous WS-ReliableMessaging v1.1 namespace:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702
  "

(also the link in the MC RDDL implies that the previous version of MC is
1.1, when in fact it is 1.0) 

3. The RDDL documents have links to new versions of the Schema and WSDL
files. These new versions are at 

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702/wsrm-1.2-schema-200702.xsd
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702/wsrm-1.2-wsdl-200702.wsdl
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702/wsmc-1.1-schema-200702.xsd
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702/wsmc-1.1-wsdl-200702.wsdl
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrmp/200702/wsrmp-1.2-schema-200702.xsd


However these aren't the files referenced by the CD's currently in public
review. The CD's still reference the RM1.1 Errata 01, RMP1.1 Errata 01,
MC1.0 Errata 01 versions of these files. Moreover the WSDLs in the list
above actually import the Errata01 schemas, not the schemas from the list
above. Given that the only difference between these "new files"
and the Errata01 is one character in the copyright statement,  I would
have thought that the RDDLs should link to the Errata01 versions, so that
they reference the same files that are declared as Normative by the new
specs (once the new versions become standard). 


Peter Niblett
IBM Senior Technical Staff Member
Lead Architect WebSphere Messaging
+44 1962 815055

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU