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

RE: ISSUE 3564: Optional Assertions may not be usable in all circumstances

From: Yalcinalp, Umit <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:38:04 -0700
Message-ID: <2BA6015847F82645A9BB31C7F9D6416502397780@uspale20.pal.sap.corp>
To: <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Hi Dan! 

Sorry for the late response on this as I am finally getting around to
all the email pile up and the fine progress the wg is making. 

Thanks very much for your support of the original proposal.
Unfortunately, I reread what I have written after my vacation in our
proposal and  I am actually not happy with my original proposed text
now. There are two reasons for this. 

(a) The proposal only targets the self describing property of a message
with respect to engagement of behaviours. It does not cover all the
pitfalls of the optional behaviours which was part of my email for
capturing the gotchas in the first place to be a suitable guideline for
option C that are related to outbound msgs and cautioning the providers
on these cases. When it was sent to the group, we have not completed all
the text that were intended to be covered yet. 

(b) The wg has decided to produce two separate documents, primer and the
guidelines targeting two separate audiences. Initally, the proposal
assumed that there would be "one" section that pertained to optionality,
however we need to account for the two documents. 

It is imperative to separate out the definition/example for optionality
than the guidelines as the same subject will require different treatment
for two separate ways. Option C clearly belongs to the second document,
not to the primer. Due to this separation of concerns, I would like to
NOT put the bullet you have advocating into the primer (and additional
text I will propose for completeness), but rather to the guidelines
document. 

I also would like to tackle this both as to what goes into the primer
and what goes into the guidelines document as well as more complete text
by next week. Apologies for the delay. 

Chris/Paul,  Could we please not tackle this tomorrow as it is part of
the agenda but rather do it next week? 


Thanks, 

--umit


----------------------

Dr. Umit Yalcinalp
Architect
NetWeaver Industry Standards
SAP Labs, LLC
Email: umit.yalcinalp@sap.com Tel: (650) 320-3095 
SDN: https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/weblogs?blog=/pub/u/36238
--------
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, 
then they fight you, then you win." Gandhi
Received on Tuesday, 26 September 2006 23:33:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:41 GMT