[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Full agenda for Tuesday Nov 29 TC meeting
The full agenda with links is attached for Today's OASIS WSRM TC teleconf. -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133Title: Full Agenda for WSRM TC Conference Call –June 14, 2005
The meeting of the WSRM TC will take place by teleconference
Time Tuesday, 29 November 2005, 05:30pm to 06:30pm ET
Description Host: Fujitsu
Toll only : 1-512-225-3050
Participant code: 375491
James Bryce Clark
03 Nov 2005 18:30:05
Recently another OASIS committee, the WS-RX TC, suggested that they
use the partial namespace:
for final versions of documents. The WS-RX TC is producing work
tentatively entitled "WS Reliable Messaging", to which the character string
"wsrm" was intended to point.
I informed them that the foregoing namespace was reserved for your TC,
and that in our document handling at OASIS, the first token space
immediately after the domain generally is populated from a controlled
vocabulary of the official TC short names. So, for example, your OASIS
standard is located at:
where "wsrm" is your TC name token, and "ws-reliability" is the product
(spec) name token.
Some members of the WS-RX TC indicated a desire to use the following
possible alternative approach:
where "wsrm" would indicate a product name, not a TC. As you may recall,
at this time, documents are uploaded to the [docs.oasis-open.org] space
only by OASIS staff action. So staff approval of the correct URI is a
practical precondition to any upload. I informed the WS-RX TC that, if we
received requests from them to upload to a URI of that kind, OASIS staff
would inquire whether your TC (as user of the "wsrm" token) had any
objection to it being used in a different context.
Objections from your TC would not necessarily be determinative, but
would be a factor about which we'd want be aware, before acting. I see
that you discussed but did not adopt a TC position on this issue at your
recent TC meeting. We would appreciate being advised of the views of such
TC members as wish to express an opinion, formally or informally.
Thanks and regards JBC
~ James Bryce Clark
~ Director, Standards Development, OASIS
The working list of potential enhancements to WS-Reliability was posted after the last f2f as:
On 9/19/2003, a paper was posted to the wsrm mailing list, edited by Jacques
After review, the TC mail list can be used to comment in this paper, as to its continued relevance to TC future activities.
Jamie Clark told Tom Rutt that there is no “mothball” status for TCs, however a TC can have two meetings a year, if it wishes to stay active in a limited capacity (such as resolution of defect reports).