[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsdm] Oracle Vote
Martin, just to make sure your statement is correct. You've said [the normative reference to WS-Trust]. The reference to WS-Trust is NOT normative in the current Committee Draft. It is 1) contained in a section that is explicitly said to be non normative [from the spec: Section 5 and appendices D, E and F are normative specifications. The rest of the document is non-normative, and is provided as a background and explanatory material.] and 2) section 6.1 lists all normative references of the specification and it does not include WS-Trust. I'm not questioning your position and merely intend to point out a possible typo on your statement. -- Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com) -- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11749 -----Original Message----- From: Martin Chapman [mailto:martin.chapman@oracle.com] Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 5:35 PM To: wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [wsdm] Oracle Vote Just to inform the group that Oracle has voted No for the approval of WSDM MUWS v1.0 and MOWS v1.0 as OASIS Specifications at this point in time. The following rationale has been provided with the vote: We are fine with WSDM having TC CD status, but the spec has dependencies on unstable specifications: WS-Addressing [1] (work in progress at [2]), WS-Resources [3], WS-ResourceProperties [4], WS-BaseNotifications [5], WS-Topics [6], WS-ResourceLifetime [7], and WS-ServiceGroups [8]. In addition WS-N uses a different version of WS-Addressing than the WSDM specs do. Hence it is premature to elevate it to the level of OASIS international specification. In particular WS-Addressing is currently being worked on and looks like the final version when it finally emerges will be significantly different from its various antecedent proprietary versions. In particular the debates and changes surrounding reference properties and parameters will mean the use of different schema types and usage patterns. None of these changes will mean that it can't be used by these higher level specifications, e.g. WSDM, etc., but they will need to be modified. The current Working Draft of the W3C WS-Addressing Working Group [2] includes this status section: "This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress." We think that this will set a dangerous precedent for OASIS. Specifications that attain the OASIS international specification level ought to be stable and have a certain amount of rigor and interop testing. Otherwise the value of the OASIS "brand" will be diluted and be ignored. We just don't see how that can be done in a responsible and stable way until the underlying specifications are mature and are themselves adopted. We note the Committee Draft Errata Discussion [9] and we are encouraged by this step, as it seems to validate our position. Unfortunately it does not address our concerns for two reasons. One: under OASIS rules: "Errata or Corrigenda to a submission are not permitted; if changes are required the Committee Draft must be withdrawn by the TC, edited, re-approved as a Committee Draft, then resubmitted." [10] Essentially that means that the TC's action have no standing or effect on the document that is being balloted. If the TC really wishes to implement this course of action, then under OASIS rules the current ballot must be withdrawn. Two: Assuming this process were followed, it would only fix one defect, namely the normative reference to WS-Trust. It does not address the problems with normative references and dependencies to unstable specifications; all of which have been revised since the ballot was out. Oracle supports the intent of the TC to track those specifications and to make changes as appropriate to the WSDM specifications. The inescapable conclusion is that it is premature, at this time to elevate the WSDM specifications to OASIS specification. In summary, it is our belief that WSDM should stay at CD until there is more implementation experience (particularly interoperability testing) and its dependent specifications are mature and are stable. [1] WS-Addressing Member Submission: http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-ws-addressing-20040810/ [2] WS-Addressing W3C WG draft: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-core-20050215/ [3] WS-Resources: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/download.php/9547/wsrf -WS-Resource-1.2-draft-01.doc [4] WS-ResourceProperties: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2004/06/wsrf-WS-ResourceProperties-1.2-d raft-04.pdf [5] WS-BaseNotifications: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsn/2004/06/wsn-WS-BaseNotification-1.2-draft -03.pdf [6] WS-Topics: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsn/2004/06/wsn-WS-Topics-1.2-draft-01.pdf [7] WS-ResourceLifetime: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2004/06/wsrf-WS-ResourceLifetime-1.2-dra ft-03.pdf [8] WS-ServiceGroups: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2004/06/wsrf-WS-ServiceGroup-1.2-draft-0 2.pdf [9] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200502/msg00027.html [10] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php (section 3 b) _________________________________________________________________ Martin Chapman Consulting Member of Technical Staff Oracle P: +353 87 687 6654 e: martin.chapman@oracle.com 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/wsdm/members/leave_workgrou p.php.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]