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

RE: WS-Addressing comments relating to WS-Policy LC

From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:08:02 -0800
To: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>, "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
CC: "[WS-A]" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4D66CCFC0B64BA4BBD79D55F6EBC225720F817DAAA@NA-EXMSG-C103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

Issue 3619 [1] was closed at the Nov 9 WG F2F meeting [2]:

<quote>
option 1: remove the example and close the issue (maryann's proposal) option 2: leave the example and close the issue (daveo's proposal) option 3: leave the example and continue working on the issue (ashok and glen's example)

preference: 2 for option 1, 14 for option 2, 0 for option 3
- and 0 cannot live with option 2

option 2 wins

</quote>

It may be that some members voted for the reason you gave but in any case the clear consensus was to close the issue and to leave the example in the specification.

This issue was re-opened as Last Call Issue 4129 [3] and the WG confirmed its original position at its meeting on Jan 10 [4] since no new evidence to change the original decision was provided.

/paulc

[1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3619
[2] http://www.w3.org/2006/11/09-ws-policy-minutes.html#item09
[3] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4129
[4] http://www.w3.org/2007/01/10-ws-policy-irc#T18-42-26

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com





> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Anish Karmarkar
> Sent: January 18, 2007 8:15 PM
> To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Cc: [WS-A]
> Subject: Re: WS-Addressing comments relating to WS-Policy LC
>
>
> Wasn't the original decision to close the issue with no action based on
> the fact that majority wanted to proceed to LC?
>
> -Anish
> --
>
> Christopher B Ferris wrote:
> >
> > Bob,
> >
> > The WS-Policy WG closed this issue with no action, based on the fact
> > that there was  no new evidence
> > presented that would change the resolution to an original decision of
> > the WG that raised the same substantive
> > question.
> >
> > Please see the resolution text in the issue itself [1]
> >
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4129
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Christopher Ferris
> > STSM, Software Group Standards Strategy
> > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> > blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/chrisferris
> > phone: +1 508 377 9295
> >
> > public-ws-policy-request@w3.org wrote on 01/08/2007 08:13:31 PM:
> >
> >  > The WS-Addressing WG has no specific comments concerning the LC
> >  > drafts of WS-Policy.
> >  > There is, however one specific Bugzilla Log, Number 4129 [1] which
> >  > relates to WS-Addressing and the manner in which Policy may be
> >  > attached to an epr.  This log has the interest of the WS-Addressing
> >  > WG and the WG is interested in the manner of its resolution.
> >  >
> >  > Thanks
> >  > -bob
> >  >
> >  > Bob Freund
> >  > Chair, WS-Addressing for the WS-Addressing WG
> >  >
> >  > [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4129
Received on Monday, 22 January 2007 21:08:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:15 GMT