RE: Questions prompted by the publication of WS-ReliableMessagin g

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 4:25 PM
To: Ugo Corda; David Orchard; www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: Questions prompted by the publication of WS-ReliableMessaging


 Why the heck are we spending all this time discussing what an OASIS TC
should be doing?  If we really wanted to keep WS-RM in the W3C we could have
aggressively gone after chartering a WG.   
 

I can think of a couple of reasons.  First, as Dave Orchard pointed out,
OASIS really is more suited for relatively small and quick specs.  As we
know, it takes about six months just to get a W3C WG off the ground.  
 
Second, there is a lot of overlap between the people and companies involved
with OASIS and W3C (not to mention WS-I).  If this list and WG add value as
a forum to discuss these issues, with the WSA document serving as a record
of their *theoretical* resolution or the rationale for the contending
*technical* issues at stake, that's fine with me.