W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > June 2002

Re: SOAP Confidentiality and Integrity: Next Step?

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:41:21 -0400
To: "Krishna Sankar" <ksankar@cisco.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20020619184121.E19C985EBF@aeon.w3.org>

On Wednesday 19 June 2002 12:10 am, Krishna Sankar wrote:
> 	One question I have is the time boxing. I had raised this
> question during the formation of the WS Description group as well. As
> far as what I know, the W3C process does not have a provision to time
> box any effort.

While there's many program and software management philosophies to help 
ensure the completion of a project in a timely manner, the big trick in the 
standardization context to me is (1) discipline and (2) addressing 
exigencies. One way of boxing an activity is to say "the charter will not 
be renewed, the WG *will* be terminated at time X." However, given the 
nature of dependencies, varied resource commitment, market FUD, legal 
wrangling and such, that can be hard to achieve. So at various stages, the 
WG and its leadership need to develop a culture of discipline (saying "no") 
so they can deal with the real problems (exigencies) when they appear.

> 	Another question is the formation process - what do we do or
> more precisely where do we start ? In [2] you were suggesting
> evangelizing/influencing the WS-Arch group. From what I read, in this
> e-mail your thoughts are to form a focused WG but still a W3C wg. One of
> the concerns I have is the 12-15 months it takes to initiative and
> deliver a standard from W3C. I am appreciative of and support the peer
> review and the rigor the W3C process brings into a domain. But could we
> have a light-weight, accelerated process for W3C standards ? May be this
> is a good time to test this. May be we need a process to deliver
> something between an amorphous note and a definitive W3C standard.

Those discussions do occur, but I suggest that if one wants to move quickly 
on this topic one builds the community under the shelter of a charter 
(which gives the means of saying "no" and takes care of intellectual 
monopoly issues (copyright, patent)) and get going. There are specs out 
there that you can use now. If you want the peer review, the dependency 
management, the IPR safety, etc., it takes time.
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2002 14:41:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:00 GMT