wss message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [wss] The Web Services Roadmap (Action #6)
- From: "Munter, Joel D" <joel.d.munter@intel.com>
- To: wss@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 11:42:49 -0700
imho,
the
purpose of having the document submitted is to place the ws-security, its
appendum, and future related submissions within their intended context.
the ws-security and the addendum documents did not simply fall out of the air
into our laps; they were submitted by the direct intent on the authors
because they fill a need documented within the roadmap document.
i feel
that it does no harm to accept the document into the WSS TC and simply allow TC
members to read it if they wish. as we work on the WSS TC
deliverables over the next few months, it may help us to deliver a set of
ws-security specifications that are relevant to the discussions included within
the roadmap. it need not be directly referenced in any future WSS TC
deliverable. i compare this to a set of pre-reading instructions that was
provided to me before working within the w3c wsawg. e.g., "...here are the
doc's, we recommend reading them before starting this work..."
in
general, i do not feel strongly one way or the other here. however, if the
WSS TC will continue on well past simply delivering a coherent set of
WS-Security specifications and will take on more challenges (as discussed within
the WS-Roadmap), then i am more more strongly in favoring of seeing the roadmap
document submitted and accepted by this WSS TC.
joel
On the TC call today, I
took an action to post an e-mail regarding the Roadmap action item (#6 on the
actions list). At the F2F meeting on September 4th & 5th, the Chairs (Chris
and I) took an action to investigate having IBM and Microsoft submit the Web
Services Security Roadmap to the TC as a non-normative document. The status on
this action is that Chris and I are working with our respective colleagues to
investigate this. However, at the call today, a question was asked along the
lines of "why is this necessary and what was the intention to do with the
Roadmap given our clarified charter specifically states that we will not evolve
a roadmap". Further, the point was made that the document is public on the web
and that we do not intend to quote from it directly. It was suggested that by
having the roadmap submitted we at least had a snapshot of the document as it
was when the original WS-Security document was submitted to th! e TC. It was
also mentioned that we reference other documents that we do not have "official
copies" of in our TC document repository. No one on the call today was able to
fully clarify what the purpose of the Roadmap document once submitted would be..
Therefore, I agreed to post this e-mail and ask the TC members to please clarify
the intended use/purpose of the roadmap once submitted and also to re-assess how
strong an issue this is. While we (the chairs) are more than happy to pursue
this action, it would be useful to know that we are spending energy on the right
issues.
Let's discuss here and
decide if there is a strong enough desire for Chris and I to aggressively pursue
this.
Many thanks
Kelvin
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC