W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > October 2006

RE: ACTION-124: Status section for WS-Policy Primer

From: Abbie Barbir <abbieb@nortel.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 10:06:32 -0400
Message-ID: <87AC5F88F03E6249AEA68D40BD3E00BE0BA979FD@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com>
To: "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org>, "Christopher B Ferris" <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <public-ws-policy@w3.org>

+1
Abbie 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Felix Sasaki
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 9:45 AM
To: Christopher B Ferris
Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: Re: ACTION-124: Status section for WS-Policy Primer


I also agree with the proposal.

Felix

Christopher B Ferris wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> 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 10/09/2006 08:30:53 PM:
> 
>> ACTION-124
>> Paul and Chris to draft status section and proposed ednotes for 
>> Primer referencing pending work on guidelines and possible issue 
>> resolutions resulting in content being moved. etc
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicy/actions/124
>>  
>> Personally I think the following status section based on what we used

>> for the first Framework WD is completely okay.  It explicitly
> states:
>> a)    that the document is a transcription of the original
contribution
>> b)    that the WG has not yet agreed with all the material
>> c)    "publication is not endorsement"
>>  
>> ===
>> Status of this Document
>> This section describes the status of this document at the time of its

>> publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of 
>> current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical 
>> report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/.
>> This is the First Public Working Draft of the Web Services Policy 1.
>> 5 - Primer specification. This Working Draft was produced by the 
>> members of the Web Services Policy Working Group. The Working Group 
>> has not yet decided if it will advance this Working Draft to 
>> Recommendation Status. It represents a transcription of the original 
>> contribution into the W3C style.
>> Note that this Working Draft does not necessarily represent a 
>> consensus of the Working Group.  Discussion of this document takes 
>> place on the public public-ws-policy@w3.org mailing list (public 
>> archive
>> ) and within Bugzilla. Comments on this specification should be made 
>> following the Description for Issues of the Working Group.
>> Publication as a Working Draft does not imply endorsement by the W3C 
>> Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or 
>> obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite

>> this document as other than work in progress.
>> This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February
>> 2004 W3C Patent Policy. W3C maintains a public list of any patent
> disclosures
>> made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also

>> includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has 
>> actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes
> contains
>> Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with 
>> section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.
>>  
>> If any addition words are needed then I would suggest the following 
>> additional text in the second paragraph before the last sentence:
>>  
>> Several issues have already been filed on this document and are
> recorded in
>> Bugzilla.  The WG has not yet considered these issues and how they 
>> relate to the Working Group's plans to publish another document 
>> current entitled "Guidelines for Policy Assertion Authors".
>>  
>> /paulc
>>  
>> PS: Note that the Bugzilla hyperlinks are searches that explicitly 
>> return only Primer issues.
>>  
>> 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: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
>> > Sent: October 5, 2006 10:16 PM
>> > To: Paul Cotton
>> > Cc: Christopher B Ferris
>> > Subject: RE: Template for status section
>> >
>> > > Your attachment was missing.
>> >
>> > hoops, sorry. Here it is.
>> >
>> > >
>> > > /paulc
>> > >
>> > > 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: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
>> > >> Sent: October 5, 2006 12:29 AM
>> > >> To: Paul Cotton; chrisfer@us.ibm.com
>> > >> Subject: Template for status section
>> > >>
>> > >> Hi Paul, Chris,
>> > >>
>> > >> Attached is my template to the status section. It contains an 
>> > >> entity call for &primer.title; , so it is not well-formed as is.
>> > >>
>> > >> Be aware that it contains the expectation "The Working Group
> expects to
>> > >> advance this Working Draft to Recommendation Status.", although 
>> > >> the Working Group has not decided this yet.
>> > >>
>> > >> Regarding our action item
>> > >> [[Felix Paul and Chris to draft status section and proposed
> ednotes for
>> > >> Primer referencing pending work on guidelines and possible issue

>> > >> resolutions resulting in content being moved. etc [recorded in 
>> > >> http://www.w3.org/2006/10/04-ws-policy-minutes.html#action06]]]
>> > >> I was fine with what Paul proposed: "how about the text saying 
>> > >> the
>> > final
>> > >> location of the text will depend on the resolution of this
> issue". But
>> > I
>> > >> would also propose to mention the guidelines document 
>> > >> explicitely. I know that this is dangerous since the Working 
>> > >> Group has not yet
> approved to
>> > >> produce the guidelines. But it would help to get Umits and 
>> > >> Maryanns agreement.
>> > >> For the AI part "proposed ednotes", I would add such an ednote 
>> > >> in
> each
>> > >> section which has a separate issue: sec. 4 (issue 3792), sec. 3
> (3794),
>> > >> sec. 2.4 (3795).
>> > >>
>> > >> These are just proposals for discussion.
>> > >>
>> > >> Felix
>> > >
>> > >
Received on Tuesday, 10 October 2006 14:11:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:42 GMT