W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > September 2003

RE: Send me Your Lists, Yearning to Breath Free ...

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:45:57 -0500
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E0313277A@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
I got a couple responses to this that indicate I was utterly unclear in
what I am suggesting.  Sorry -- I think I was basing this too much on
context established in the telcon, some of it off-line.  Let me try
It was suggested on the telcon that the WG develop a list of standards
efforts related to Web services.  One comment about the suggestion was
to question whether anyone was willing to do the work.  I am sort of
volunteering to do the following:
All of us seem to have made such lists for internal use, but many seem
to view at least aspects of this work as confidential.  On the other
hand, the landscape is complex and we could all probably benefit from
combining our knowledge.  I know that I certainly would.  So I am sort
of proposing an, "I'll show you mine if you show me yours".  More
specifically, if people send me their lists of standards efforts,
suitably edited if you like to remove sensitive information, I will
commit to do the following (if I am able -- I say this in case I get
input expressed in a way that I can't figure out how to handle):
1 - Combine them in such a way that individual authorship is more or
less disguised.
2 - Remove any statements that seem unwise to make public.  For example,
if I get, "That spec mostly comes from IBM and they're all clueless
doofuses there", I will chuckle privately but it ain't gonna get
3 - Circulate the combined product to the contributors for comment
before making public.
4 - Keep the original submissions private.
5 - Respect requests NOT to use a submission unless there are a critical
number, Nc, of submissions.  I suggest Nc=3 might be reasonable.
6 - Use my own list (which is not all that great) as one of the
Note that the commitment to confidentiality applies within my company,
subject to the following:
A - If push comes to shove I'm not sure I can withhold information from
my employer that I develop on their time.  I can't imagine, however, how
this would become relevant.  I'm certainly not going to handle anything
confidential inside CVX in a way that would be likely to leak out.
B - If under 5 above I get a submission I can't use, of course if I
learn something from it I ain't gonna try to forget it.
To be more specific about what submissions might look at, here is an
entry from my list about reliable messaging (which seems to be the
example we keep using).  Note that it contains URL's, a brief summary of
what it's about, and some comments about relative maturity and
relationship to other specs.  (I'm not sure if the URL's are going to
come through properly to the mailing list, but in the version I have
copied below the URL's are links).
Web Services Reliable Messaging
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsrm.  A
protocol that allows messages to be delivered reliably between
distributed applications in the presence of software component, system,
or network failures by implementing an acknowledgement infrastructure.
Based on WS-Reliability submission from Oracle, Sun and others
A competing spec called WS-ReliableMessaging
dnglobspec/html/ws-reliablemessaging.asp) from Microsoft, IBM, BEA and
others has not yet been submitted to any organization.   The two specs
are, in substance, pretty similar
-----Original Message-----
From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) 
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 3:37 PM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Send me Your Lists, Yearning to Breath Free ...

As a followon from off-line discussions on IRC in the telcon today -- it
seems that most of us have our own lists of Web services specification
efforts, both formal and informal, with some sort of characterization or
description of what they are about.  I have one, but it ain't very good
or complete.  Some of these efforts I can find but I don't really
understand what they are about -- and I think there are others that I'm
missing.  If anybody wants to send me their list, suitably edited if you
like to take out confidential information, I would be glad to try to
correlate, combine them with mine and send the result back to the
Received on Friday, 12 September 2003 10:46:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:08 UTC