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

Re: New Issue: (Bug 4391) WS-Policy 1.5 Attachment - Update refe renc es to point to latest UDDI specs

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 06:44:27 +0900
Message-ID: <45F71B3B.3030903@w3.org>
To: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Cc: Prasad Yendluri <prasad.yendluri@webmethods.com>, "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>

Paul Cotton wrote:
>> Unless we want to point to latest always.
>>     
>
> I doubt we will get agreement to do this from WG members.  This is a serious decision since it implies their implementation has to track the UDDI work rather than be based on a single stable spec (if this is a normative reference).
>   

there are various examples of "spec X or its successor" links, one in 
XML, see http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#sec-lang-tag : "The values of the 
attribute are language identifiers as defined by [IETF RFC 3066] 
<http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#RFC1766>, Tags for the Identification of 
Languages, or its successor; in addition, the empty string may be 
specified." .
another example is the reference to Unicode taking normally by W3C specs:

Unicode
    The Unicode Consortium, The Unicode Standard, Version 4
    <http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/versions/>, ISBN
    0-321-18578-1, as updated from time to time by the publication of
    new versions. (See http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/versions
    <http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/versions/> for the latest
    version and additional information on versions of the standard and
    of the Unicode Character Database).

for these two specs there is enough "trust" within W3C that the IETF and 
the Unicode consortium will do "the right thing" for later versions. But 
it is a case by case basis whether a WG wants to give that trust to a spec.

Regards, Felix.

>
>
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-
>> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Prasad Yendluri
>> Sent: March 13, 2007 4:33 PM
>> To: Felix Sasaki; Prasad Yendluri
>> Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: New Issue: (Bug 4391) WS-Policy 1.5 Attachment - Update refe
>> renc es to point to latest UDDI specs
>>
>>
>> I think that makes sense as the latest is a moving target.
>> Unless we want to point to latest always.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 1:23 PM
>> To: Prasad Yendluri
>> Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: New Issue: (Bug 4391) WS-Policy 1.5 Attachment - Update
>> referenc es to point to latest UDDI specs
>>
>> Hi Prasad,
>>
>> Prasad Yendluri wrote:
>>     
>>> See bugzilla entry: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4391
>>>
>>> _Title_: Update WS-Policy 1.5 Attachment to point to latest UDDI specs
>>> in the references section
>>>
>>> _Target_: WS-Policy 1.5 - Attachment
>>>
>>> _Description_:
>>>
>>> The WS-Policy 1.5 Attachment CR specification references older version
>>> of UDDI v3 specification in the References section.
>>>
>>> It needs to be updated to reference version 3.0.2.
>>>
>>> _Proposed Resolution_:
>>>
>>> Update the current reference below
>>>
>>> / /
>>>
>>> */[UDDI 3.0] /*
>>>
>>> /UDDI Version 3.0.1 <http://uddi.org/pubs/uddi-v3.0.1-20031014.htm>//,
>>> L. Clement, et al, Editors. //Organization for the Advancement of
>>> Structured Information Standards, 14 October 2003. This version of the
>>> UDDI Version 3.0 is http://uddi.org/pubs/uddi-v3.0.1-20031014.htm. /
>>>
>>> To use the latest version of the UDDI 3.0
>>> <http://uddi.org/pubs/uddi_v3.htm> specification that is available at
>>> http://uddi.org/pubs/uddi_v3.htm.
>>>
>>>       
>> Would you agree with having both a specific *and* a generic reference,
>> that is: to UDDI 3.02. and the latest version of UDDI 3.0 ?
>>
>> Regards, Felix.
>>     
>
>   
Received on Tuesday, 13 March 2007 21:44:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:48 GMT