W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > February 2007

RE: Features at Risk

From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 21:20:30 -0800
To: "tom@coastin.com" <tom@coastin.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
CC: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C9BF0238EED3634BA1866AEF14C7A9E534E29EAB1D@NA-EXMSG-C116.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

> This feature has already found use in reaching
> concensus in the WS-RX TC regarding delivery
> assertion policy assetions.

Does RM use ignorable policy assertions? Any references?

Regards,

Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation


-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tom Rutt
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 12:30 PM
To: Paul Cotton
Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: Re: Features at Risk


Paul Cotton wrote:
> This is a reminder that we discussed this proposal at the Feb 7 meeting and held off making a decision about the proposed three "at risk" features until next week's meeting.
>
I think it is important that Ignorable Policy assertions are not marked
at risk.

This feature has already found use in reaching concensus in the WS-RX TC
regarding delivery
assertion policy assetions.  Its definition only affects the default
policy intersection algorithm implementation (unless I am missing
something more subtle).

I am against marking a) below as "at risk" feature, because it is so
important.


Tom Rutt
Fujitsu
> We also agreed to have some email discussion which I am trying to encourage by bringing this back to your attention.
>
> /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: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-
>> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Asir Vedamuthu
>> Sent: February 7, 2007 11:16 AM
>> To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
>> Subject: Features at Risk
>>
>>
>> To advance WS-Policy to Proposed Recommendation, the Working Group needs
>> to show that each feature in the Framework and Attachment drafts has been
>> implemented. Thus far, there aren't any publicly visible implementations
>> for the following features:
>>
>> a) Ignorable Policy Assertions
>> b) External Policy Attachment
>> c) Attaching Policies Using UDDI
>>
>> For a successful Candidate Recommendation phase, we request the WG to
>> consider marking features a)-c) as being at risk (the history is that most
>> of the features marked as being at risk were implemented by multiple
>> vendors).
>>
>> Also, in Nov, W3C requested the Working Group to consider marking feature
>> a) as being at risk [1].
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Nov/0077.html
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Asir S Vedamuthu
>> Microsoft Corporation
>>
>>
>
>
>


--
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt        email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
Received on Friday, 9 February 2007 05:21:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:47 GMT