Re: [wsrp] Target for submission of WSRP to OASIS

[Alejandro Abdelnur <Alejandro.Abdelnur@Sun.COM>]

I agree with Bill's comments.

I would just highlight this one paragraph from his comments:

> Since we've spent so much effort on the coordination of the specs, locking WSRP into the OASIS Standard process now seems precipitous -- WSRP won't be able to change, even though 168 can continue to change. So we'd lose the ability to make final corrections to one of the coordinated specs.

Alejandro

On Thursday, June 26, 2003, at 06:02  PM, William Cox wrote:

> Rich (and the TC) --
>
> I'd like to provide some additional context for this discussion.
>
> To simplify the programming model, we made a decision early on to coordinate WSRP and JSR 168 as closely as possible. In my view, that decision has and will help takeup and adoption of both specifications, and has certainly led to greater interest - the BOF I addressed at Java One was very interested in both WSRP and JSR 168, and especially excited at the combination and coordination. A specification that's almost-coordinated will increase the complexity of implementing both specs.
>
> With the  Public Review of JSR 168 in process (Alejandro said it's already submitted, and will be publicly (Public-ly?) visible the second week of July, which I think is the week of 7 July-11 July. Alejandro?), several vendors will be announcing and/or shipping early access versions of JSR 168 and WSRP. More importantly, developers will be using them both and providing early feedback on issues.
>
> Since we've spent so much effort on the coordination of the specs, locking WSRP into the OASIS Standard process now seems precipitous -- WSRP won't be able to change, even though 168 can continue to change. So we'd lose the ability to make final corrections to one of the coordinated specs.
>
> When we voted in mid-May to prefer July 15th as the submission date to the OASIS Standard process, many of us presumed that JSR 168 would be in Public Review in early June.  The Real World didn't go along: the Public Review period is starting in the next two weeks, rather than starting earlier. Now we have more concrete dates and an opportunity to complete the coordination we've worked on (and promised to the producer and consumer community).
>
> Once a Committee Specification is submitted into the OASIS Standard process, no changes are permitted without restarting that entire process from Committee Specification forward--no errata or corrigenda are permitted.  So if a change or clarification is needed, the entire process starts again from voting on a new Committee Specification.
>
> In summary, we lose some of the advantage we invested so much in if we submit on July 15th, and can visibly adjust the Public Review JSR 168 and WSRP 1 by planning on August 15th.
>
> bill cox
>
> Rich Thompson wrote:
>
>  
> Late discussion on today's TC call related to when WSRP should be submitted to OASIS. Issues raised:
>
>  - JSR 168 public review plans were delayed from our discussion in May.
>  - JSR 168 is just now going into public review (expected public visibility on 7/11 [Sun is closed next week])
>  - There has been a strong intent of producing aligned WSRP and JSR 168 standards in order to keep the programming models straight forward
>  - Risk raised is that submitting now would leave reviewing how the alignment changes during the JSR 168 public review with the OASIS Board. Any comments they produce would likely start a new 3-month cycle.
>  - Discussion in May set a target of submitting in July as:
>      - Several vendor products are interoperating. The number involved continues to grow (currently at 5).
>      - Errata emanating from these tests has tended toward clarification rather than changing things that are broken.
>      - Any real issues are more likely to occur once the spec is released and supported by a number of vendors and will have to be fixed in v1.1 or v2.
>
> Question raised:
> Why not delay 1 month to provide greater opportunity to test interoperability and vet any impacts of issues discovered during the JSR 168 public review?
>
> Please use this email thread to vet opinions on this subject. In addition, I will schedule an 8 PT, 11ET, 5CET teleconference for tomorrow (6/27) for those wishing to discuss it verbally. I will also establish a vote in the Kavi system for this question with a closing date of next Tuesday (7/1).
>
> Rich Thompson
>
> <william.cox.vcf>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp/members/leave_workgroup.php