ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Proposed agenda for this weeks call (9 Feb)
- From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
- To: Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 10:32:21 -0500
Paul,
Looks good to me. Thanks!
Cheers,
Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=440
phone: +1 508 377 9295
Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com> wrote on 02/08/2006
10:04:45 AM:
> Chris
>
> I appreciate your logic. I am itching to finish off i021 and i008
> (because they are past their sell by date) but I agree with your thinking.
>
> I guess you are suggesting the following list:
>
> i089 suggest the restricted use of anonymous URI
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i089
>
> i094 Doug Davis New WSRMRequired Fault
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i094
>
> i091 Bob Freund-Hitachi Unexpected UnknownSequenceFault
or
> SequenceTerminatedFault
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i091
>
> i092 Anish Karmarkar Where is the SequenceAcknowledgement
sent on
> receipt of AckRequested header?
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i092
>
> i061 Doug Davis Anonymous
AcksTo
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i061
>
> i090 Daniel Millwood Use of offered sequences
unclear in current
> spec
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i090
>
> i021 Jacques Durand An RM
Policy applies two-way
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i021
>
> i008 Tom Rutt Policy
assertions granularity
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i008
>
> Any objections from the TC to this new proposed list?
>
> Christopher B Ferris wrote:
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > I'd like to request a reordering of the issues discussion, and
to
> > request that a couple of
> > additional issues be added to the proposed list for
> > discussion/resolution.
> >
> > I would really like to see us make progress against the core
spec, and
> > frankly, aside from
> > the offer/accept issue, I don't believe that the remaining issues
> > against the core spec
> > are all that contentious.
> >
> > I think that by having a discussion around policy first will
serve to
> > essentially ensure that we
> > make no other progress this week. IBM would like to see the issues
> > with the core spec
> > addressed as expediciously as possible so as to determine if
there are
> > any clarifications
> > that might effect the interop scenarios.
> >
> > I'd like to request that issues i089 [1] and i094 [2] be teed
up for
> > discussion/resolution.
> > i089 is mislabeled as "Active" as opposed to "active",
and as such
> > does not show up in
> > the open issues list. Both are (IMO) non-controversial and we
should
> > be able to dispatch
> > them quickly.
> >
> > I'd also request that issues i091, i092 and i061 be moved up
in the
> > agenda, as I think that
> > they could also be quickly resolved, allowing the TC to make
some
> > substantial progress
> > towards closing the remaining few issues against the core spec.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Christopher Ferris
> > STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
> > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> > blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=440
> > phone: +1 508 377 9295
> >
> > Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com> wrote on 02/06/2006 04:23:36
PM:
> >
> > > 1) Roll Call
> > >
> > > 2) Review and approval of the agenda
> > >
> > > 3) Approval of the previous meeting minutes
> > >
> > > 4) Editor's team and Interop - WD/CD basis of the Interop
> > > The Interop committee have requested that the Editor's team
could
> > > produce a new WD including all the pending issues agreed
by the end of
> > > last weeks call
> > > (i058, 75, 78, 82, 83, 85, 86, 87, 88, 93 by my calculation),
by Feb
> > 17th.
> > > i) Status check.
> > > ii) Conversion to CD
> > >
> > > 5) AI Review
> > >
> > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/members/action_items.php
> > >
> > > 6) New issues since last conf-call
> > > Email to follow
> > >
> > > 7) Issue Discussion:
> > >
> > > i021 Jacques Durand An
RM Policy applies two-way
> > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i021
> > >
> > > i008 Tom Rutt
Policy assertions granularity
> > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i008
> > >
> > > i090 Daniel Millwood Use of offered
sequences unclear in current
> > > spec
> > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i090
> > >
> > > i091 Bob Freund-Hitachi Unexpected
UnknownSequenceFault or
> > > SequenceTerminatedFault
> > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i091
> > >
> > > i092 Anish Karmarkar Where is
the SequenceAcknowledgement
> > sent on
> > > receipt of AckRequested header?
> > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i092
> > >
> > > i061 Doug Davis
Anonymous AcksTo
> > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i061
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Paul Fremantle
> > > VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
> > >
> > > http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
> > > paul@wso2.com
> > >
> > > "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
> > >
>
> --
>
> Paul Fremantle
> VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
>
> http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
> paul@wso2.com
>
> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
>
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]