As one of the folks that earlier stirred
the XQuery pot, I concur: +1
-----Original Message-----
From: Yaron Goland
[mailto:ygoland@bea.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003
2:45 PM
To: 'Danny van der Rijn';
wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 11
Your opinion requested
Both proposals cause me
to worry. I know I'm no where near enough of an expert in the XML infomodel and
XPATH's abstract model to be sure of the total consequences of our actions. But
given that XQUERY is coming and is likely to be a huge hit I would hate to see
us choose an option that cuts us off from the future, which the XPATH proposal
appears to do. Basically I'm +1ing Tony Andrew's comment.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Danny van der Rijn
[mailto:dannyv@tibco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003
10:55 AM
To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [wsbpel] Issue - 11 Your
opinion requested
At the conference call this morning,
I presented issue 11 as it has progressed so far. The current state is
that there are 2 proposals on the table, both of which are equivalent in terms
of what they accomplish, but we don't need both of them. The desire is
that we get some feedback from the TC as to which avenue to pursue, so that we
can flush out one of them, and present it to the TC for a vote. Links to
the issues are below. If you have any opinon at all, please respond to
this mail with AT LEAST +A/-A +B/-B so we can gauge reactions to the
proposals. If you want to share reasons for your opinion, that is
welcome, too. Note that you should take these proposals as
partially-baked. We plan to refine the "winning" proposal into
one that is spec-worthy.
On the call and in email since the
summaries were posted, there has been some discussion. I have linked the
email point here, and I hope that those who expressed support for either option
(I believe it was just Yaron, but I could be wrong) will repeat them in email
for posterity. Unfortunately, Chris Keller was not on the call at the
time of discussion, and I was unable to present his proposal with the clarity
that he would have, so the discussion may have been skewed in favor of my
proposal. If that occurred, it was certainly not my intention to bias the
discussion.
The hope is that we will get a sense
of direction by the next conference call, and failing that, at the September
face to face. Putting the issue to a Kavi ballot for a sense of direction
was also raised (by Monica Martin?), since that would force those who cared to
state their opinion.
|