RE: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014

["Green, Alastair J." <Alastair.Green@choreology.com>]

I don't reconcile it, because I had nothing to do with that
misjudgement. Why persist in error? As Santayana observed "Those who
cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

Play the ball, not the man. 

Alastair

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: 28 July 2005 20:11
To: Green, Alastair J.
Cc: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com; Marc Goodner; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014

Alastair writes:

> Plus, the TC/spec name clash is, as Ashok, points out, confusing to
the
> outer world. My contacts in the end-user world are already confused.

How do you reconcile that with the fact that the WSRM TC produced a spec

called WS-Reliability?

I, for one, prefer that the name of the spec not be changed as that
will, 
IMO, keep the confusion 
to a minimum. Adding yet another spec name to the mix will only serve to

increase confusion, not decrease it
as Marc points out.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
phone: +1 508 377 9295

"Green, Alastair J." <Alastair.Green@choreology.com> wrote on 07/28/2005

02:00:17 PM:

> I agree with Oracle. The name WS-RX becomes associated with the open
> process spec, as an output. This differentiates it from the
proprietary
> process input spec, and also is symbolic of the fusion of input from
the
> WS-Reliability group. 
> 
> A + B = C <> A, even if A > B. 
> 
> Plus, the TC/spec name clash is, as Ashok, points out, confusing to
the
> outer world. My contacts in the end-user world are already confused.
> 
> Alastair
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: 28 July 2005 18:48
> To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014
> 
> I disagree. Adding yet another document name does nothing to stop any
> confusion regarding names, it only increases it. The document names as
> contributed are already well established, changing them only
introduces
> a new challenge for this TC that we don't need of promoting the new
> name. Keeping the document names the same as the contributions keeps
the
> status quo that has been in this area for some. Asking people to learn
a
> new name for these specs to reduce confusion is counter intuitive.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:51 AM
> To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ws-rx] [WS-RX] Issue i014
> 
> The Oracle folks would like to express our preference on issue i014.
> 
> We would like the documents to be named WS-RX (Web Services Reliable
> Exchange).
> This aligns the names of the documents with the name of the WG.  It
also
> removes possible confusion with other documents in the same space.
> 
> All the best, Ashok
> 
>