W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org > June 2007

RE: Action Property Issue (Web Services Addressing 1.0 - Metadata)

From: Cindy McNally <cindymcnally_6@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:46:01 +0000
Message-ID: <BAY117-F30D4D96635BA128F534329A7130@phx.gbl>
To: plh@w3.org
Cc: public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org


I believe that this is a substantive issue that should be reconsidered.  I 
will post a follow-up citing technical arguments and a proposed change.  
Please note that two related issues were never formally addressed by the 



Also, from a procedural standpoint, should my follow-up be worded as a 
'formal objection' or would that occur after reconsideration by the 
workgroup, i.e. assuming the issue is closed again with no action?

>From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
>To: cindymcnally_6@hotmail.com
>CC: public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org
>Subject: RE: Action Property Issue (Web Services Addressing 1.0 - Metadata)
>Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:09:55 +0000
>the Web Services Addressing Working Group would like to move Web
>Services Addressing 1.0 - Metadata to Candidate Recommendation. Since
>the Group decided, after due considerations, to close your issue with no
>action [1], we'd like to hear from you and know if you're ok with us
>moving forward or if you would like the Group to reconsider it. We'd
>appreciate if you can tell us your position asap. Failing to hear from
>you by June 21, we would request the Director to move forward,
>Thank you,

Who's that on the Red Carpet? Play & win glamorous prizes. 
Received on Monday, 18 June 2007 14:46:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:49:00 UTC