[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Re: Issue 34 - Proposal for vote
At 10:12 AM 5/26/2004, Satish Thatte wrote: >Notice I carefully said "abstraction relative to a standards proposal" >which *could* mean that we don't bind ourselves to a fixed namespace, >depending on emerging timelines. I don't think we will delay finishing >BPEL just because we are waiting for other standards work to be >completed. Exactly. which means that we will have to pick some "fixed" thing in order to finish off BPEL. There are only two possible outcomes in the W3C, either a WG to work on this issue is chartered or it is not. One outcome may give us warm fuzzies, but i don't see how there is any practical effect on this version of BPEL. I just don't understand why the technique which our sibling TC's are adopting won't work for this TC. To be fair, I suppose it is technically possible to stay completely silent on the subject, and hope no one notices yet another chink in the chimera of Web Services interoperability. jeff >-----Original Message----- >From: Martin Chapman [mailto:martin.chapman@oracle.com] >Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 9:59 AM >To: Satish Thatte; ygoland@bea.com; 'Ron Ten-Hove' >Cc: 'Francisco Curbera'; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Re: Issue 34 - Proposal for vote > >No offence to W3C, but they wouldn't have anything usable for at least >18 months. >Do we want to delay BPEL that long? > >Martin. > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com] > >Sent: 26 May 2004 15:59 > >To: ygoland@bea.com; Ron Ten-Hove > >Cc: Francisco Curbera; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org > >Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Re: Issue 34 - Proposal for vote > > > > > >I agree with Yaron on this. I suspect we will have to employ > >some abstraction relative to a standards proposal because, > >unlike WSDL 2.0, we have no established prior art to take a > >dependency on -- at least I haven't seen anyone propose such > >an alternative dependency. > > > >________________________________ > > > >From: Yaron Y. Goland [mailto:ygoland@bea.com] > >Sent: Tue 5/25/2004 11:34 PM > >To: Ron Ten-Hove > >Cc: Francisco Curbera; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org > >Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Re: Issue 34 - Proposal for vote > > > > > > > >Issue 34 is not, to the best of my knowledge, an issue upon > >which there are a large number of dependencies. Furthermore, > >there is nothing inherent in the W3C process that would > >prohibit rapid progress on a spec with full adoption in a time > >span that is shorter than the expected lifespan of this group. > >Therefore I support delaying a vote on this issue while we see > >what happens in the W3C. > > > > Yaron > > > >Ron Ten-Hove wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Paco, > >> > >> I appreciate your response, but I respectfully have to > >say that I > >> still don't understand the value of delay. To address your points: > >> > >> Let us suppose that we do delay, and that in two or > >three months a > >> W3C working group is created to develop WS-MD/WS-A into public > >> specifications. Could we, the WS-BPEL TC, then take a dependency on > >> this anticipated new specification? The answer is clearly no, as the > >> WSDL 2.0 precedent you cited shows. Therefore waiting for such a > >> working group to form is rather pointless. Or had you in mind > >> something different from a dependency on such a specification? > >> > >> Our TC has a large number of outstanding issues to be resolved, > >> many of which "interact" with each other. The sooner we resolve some > >> issues, the easier it will be to resolve the remaining ones. We do > >> have a limited amount of time available [1], and deliberate delays > >> will ultimately delay the completion of our work. (This TC > >formed over > >> a year ago; my eldest child has grown over ten centimetres in that > >> time span! :-) > >> > >> -Ron > >> > >> [1] Our charter states that "The final draft of the resultant > >> specification will be due within 9 months of the first > >meeting", so we > >> are already late. > >> > >> Francisco Curbera wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > > >> >Ron, > >> > > >> >I was pointing out that things seem to be moving, after the recent > >> w3c >submission. Waiting for standards is clearly not a > >requirements, > >> as our >position wrt WSDL 2.0 shows. on the other hand, if a > >> submitted document >were to become the seed of a working group we > >> would have a clear reference >point to build upon. Since a delay of > >> this decision comes at essentially no > >> >price, it seems unnecessary to rush to close it. > >> > > >> >Paco > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from > >the roster > >> of the OASIS TC), go to > >> > >http://www.oasis->open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_work > >> group.php. > >> > >> > > > >To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the > >roster of the OASIS TC), go to > >http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/lea >ve_workgroup.php. > > > > >To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of >the OASIS TC), go to >http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgr >oup.php. > > > >To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of >the OASIS TC), go to >http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php. Jeff Mischkinsky jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com Consulting Member Technical Staff +1(650)506-1975 Director, Web Services Standards 500 Oracle Parkway M/S 4OP9 Oracle Corporation Redwood Shores, CA 94065
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]