Status and Proposed schedule

[Peter Niblett <peter_niblett@uk.ibm.com>]

As we have started a new year, it seems an appropriate time to review our
current status, and suggest a schedule for 2006 for the three "main"
specifications.

WS-BaseNotification and WS-BrokeredNotification completed their second
public review period on January 4th. There were no comments from this
review. We have one issue open against the public review draft (WSN 2.64)
and I have posted a document that is tracking a number of other potential
minor issues. It is

http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsn/download.php/16442/WSN%20errata%20and%20possible%20improvements.htm

It seems to me that we have done the bulk of the work on these
specifications and I would like to try and complete the remainder of our
work in a reasonably speedy fashion. I think the remaining work includes:

i)  Proofreading activity, to remove typos and grammatical inconsistencies
- I would like to ask for one or two volunteers to help with this
ii) Resolution of any further technical issues.

I propose the following schedule (if we can improve on these dates I would
be delighted).

30 Jan.     Agree approach on remaining issues
30 Jan-13 Feb.  Proof reading and issue resolution
20 Feb-27 Feb  CD/PR3 vote
27 Feb-22 Mar  PR3 setup and review period
22-Mar-29 Mar  Committee spec vote


I estimate that the OASIS standards approval process will then take 2 or 3
months more. In order to proceed to this stage, we will need 3 member
organisations to certify that they are successfully using the
specifications. I am not asking for certification now, but I would
appreciate it if TC members could indicate if they might be in a position
to do this at that stage.

WS-Topics will complete its first public review on Feb 18th. We have one
open issue (WSN 4.29). I would like to run this specification to the same
schedule as the Base and Brokered specifications, so that we can do the
voting and PR administration for all three specs at the same time. So this
will mean working internally towards a PR2 draft while PR1 is still in
progress. If there are any late-breaking issues raised against WS-Topics as
a result of PR1, then we will have to revisit this approach and either
break the coupling or delay the Base and Brokered Specs.

I would like to end by thanking everyone for their work on the specs during
2005

Peter