[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Has anyone proposed a RM'g panel session for Oct 6th OASIS Adoption Forum in Brussels?
-THe agenda lists Reliable Messaging as a topic of interest, but I have not heard about any proposal. Has one been submitted? Is it now too late/ past submission deadline? Do we fear another rock throwing/ mud slinging affair with the authors of the competing spec?
-Also, there were some mails indicating are next f2f would be co-located with this Adoption Forum, but nothing was ever scheduled. Where and when is are next f2f?
Can we please put these two items on the agenda for tomorrow's call
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Bunting
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:07:56 -0700
Subject: [wsrm] What changed in 1.07?
> Well, pretty much everything. The -diff file I provided is not of much
> use since it underscores every space or comma deleted and each mundane
> change to the document. The comparison also groups too many small changes
> together, ruining the headers (at least) and making it difficult to see
> what actually changed.
> All outstanding issues were addressed in this revision except the very
> few noted below and in the detailed changes documents[3,4] (should be about
> the same list). The "List of action items" document and related
> "ReplyTo fixes" document describes most of the technical changes made to
> the document. Please note that we editors may have done some word smith ing
> and a touch of rearranging as we addressed these issues; such editing will
> not be reflected in these two[3,4] documents.
> By my count, we have 3 main areas of confusion and issues remaining:
> - Response@replyPattern, the subject of my "Technical issues as I go
> through action items..." email [not mentioned in the detailed changes
> - CF4 or group termination in the case of a catastrophic failure
> - MP8 or the meaning of the Other Reliability Properties discussed in B.6
> At a lower level of detail,
> - the sentence "A property is an assertion or constraint on a specific RM
> capability and its value(s) associated with WSDL elements." near the top
> (2nd sentence) of B3.3 has given the editors pause. Mark's original
> question was "What's associated with WSDL elements here: a property, a
> constraint, an RM capabil ity, or its values?"
> - Mark also noted the sentence "For the Callback and Poll RM-Reply
> Patterns, a Response element can contain multiple Acknowledgment and/or RM
> Fault Indications." near the bottom of Section 6. This should be redundant
> with something in Section 4.4 but the closest "something" is in 4.3.2,
> about support for asking questions about multiple groups in a single
> PollRequest. Since Tom seems to be leaning toward removing such
> flexibility, I have done nothing to address this issue.
> I would recommend particularly thorough review of the changes I made
> related to AI 1.4 Action 072004-2, resolution to Chris F comments 1, 2, 10,
> 19 and 24 -- this exact set of changes has not been discussed within the TC
> though it follows much discussion.
> Some mundane things besides commas include:
> - correcting the 2119 terminology issues I ment ioned earlier
> general rule: when requirement is enforced in schema OK to describe in
> full text that requirement but without RFC 2119 keywords
> - removal of some redundancies between the agreement item descriptions or
> abstract model and the element and attribute descriptions in Section 4
> general rule: Check every MUST for redundancy, which may go back to
> overall agreement item descriptions.
> general rule: section 4 needs few MUSTs because most will repeat things
> in section 3 may find a few rules missing from section 3
> general rule: better to express the requirements at a higher level as
> long as that does not lose information and the specific elements are tied
> directly to the abstract requirements
> - making the links between those elements and attributes and the agreement
> items or abstract model more explicit
> - adding more docume nt automation -- allowing tables, figures and sections
> to reorder and move without further problems. This should have enabled a
> "navigable" document that allowed readers to jump from the ToC and other
> cross-references but I forget the magic incantation to get that working in
> the saved PDF version. References to everything but the examples are live
> in the source document but not the PDF.
> - ToC now shows three levels. If you like, the above automation makes it
> easy to change this back to two or up to four or five... Also added a list
> of tables.
> - correcting the "element structure" figures (6 and 7) to place the "any"
> at the start
> - used more consistent spelling, formatting, phrases and punctuation throughout
> - kept all of the examples, tables and figures together (and with their
> captions) on a page -- nothing major should stil l be split between pages.
>  http://tinyurl.com/6oy89
>  http://tinyurl.com/54rjp
>  http://tinyurl.com/4ldwa
>  http://tinyurl.com/4hpke
> 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/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
2013 Acacia Ct
Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482
1 408 863 6042 voice
1 408 863 6099 fax