from August 2009 by subject

ACTION-103, ACTION-104: completed

Action-106 - proposed UDDI entry for JMS transport

ACTION-107: regen testcase doc assertions table

ACTION-91 - proposal to resolve ISSUE-8

Action-93 resolved

Agenda for 2009-08-04 conference call

Agenda for 2009-08-11 conference call

Agenda for 2009-08-25 conference call

Agenda for 2009-09-01 conference call

Agenda for the 2009-08-18 conference call

ISSUE-10: Combine redundant assertions 2016 and 2017

ISSUE-10: update available

ISSUE-11 (requestURI in response message?): Should SOAPJMS_requestURI be in the response message? [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

ISSUE-1: update available

ISSUE-2: update available

ISSUE-3: update available

ISSUE-5: update available

ISSUE-6: update available

ISSUE-7: update available

ISSUE-8: update available

ISSUE-9: clarification on proposed re-wording of assertions

ISSUE-9: Clarify wording of assertions that deal with fault subcodes [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

Minutes 2009/08/11

NEW ISSUE: Should SOAPJMS_requestURI be in the response message?

URI Specification IP Language

Last message date: Monday, 31 August 2009 21:59:38 UTC