RE: [wsrm] Name of this technical committee / standard ...

["Sindambiwe, Eugene" <eugene.sindambiwe@sap.com>]

I agree with Mark in that WS-Reliability is rather misleading. Also note that 
Web Services Reliable Messaging (WSRM) was already the name of the draft 
by Fujitsu et al. which was published even before the spec by IBM+Microsoft et al. 
In the absence of a better alternative we should keep the spec. and TC name as it is despite the confusion caused by the name crash. 
Eugene
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Little [mailto:m.c.little@ncl.ac.uk]
Sent: Donnerstag, 10. April 2003 10:53
To: Mark D. Hansen; WSRM-TC (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [wsrm] Name of this technical committee / standard ...


WS-Reliability is a bad name (for the spec. and for this TC) because it can
be read as meaning we address all aspects of reliability for Web services,
which we obviously don't do. I hate to say it, but Web Services Reliable
Messaging does covey exactly the right connotations.

Mark.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark D. Hansen" <khookguy@yahoo.com>
To: "WSRM-TC (E-mail)" <wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 3:26 AM
Subject: [wsrm] Name of this technical committee / standard ...


> Which is the official name of this technical committee and this
> standard?
>
> (1) Web Services Reliability (WS-Reliability)
> ... or ...
> (2) Web Services Reliable Messaging (WSRM)
>
> Maybe we should stick with (1) because (2) looks too much like the
> IBM/Microsoft effort called Web Services Reliable Messaging Protocol
> (WS-ReliableMessaging).
>
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> -- Mark
>
> Mark Hansen
> email: khookguy@yahoo.com
>
>