public-soap-jms@w3.org from July 2010 by subject

Action 183 complete - updated to reflect approved changes for ISSUE 38

• Eric Johnson (Friday, 9 July)

ACTION 186 - top to bottom review of current copy of spec

• Eric Johnson (Friday, 16 July)
• Eric Johnson (Monday, 12 July)
• Eric Johnson (Monday, 12 July)
• Eric Johnson (Monday, 12 July)

ACTION-179 done....

• Eric Johnson (Friday, 9 July)

ACTION-189 complete - applied resolution of ISSUE-40

• Eric Johnson (Friday, 16 July)

ACTION-190 - reviewing test cases for JMSCorrelationID

• Eric Johnson (Monday, 19 July)

ACTION-194 - apply resolutions to issues 41-46

• Eric Johnson (Monday, 19 July)

Agenda for 2010-07-06 conference call

• Eric Johnson (Tuesday, 6 July)

Agenda for the 2010-07-13 conference call

• Eric Johnson (Monday, 12 July)

Agenda for the 2010-07-20 conference call

• Eric Johnson (Tuesday, 20 July)
• Rokicki, Derek (Tuesday, 20 July)
• Phil Adams (Tuesday, 20 July)
• Peter Easton (Tuesday, 20 July)
• Eric Johnson (Monday, 19 July)

Agenda for the 2010-07-27 conference call

• Eric Johnson (Monday, 26 July)

Applied changes for ACTION-185

• Mark Phillips (Tuesday, 6 July)

Applied resolution for Issue 39 (ACTION 188)

• Mark Phillips (Thursday, 8 July)

Completion of Action-192

• Mark Phillips (Tuesday, 13 July)

FYI: RFC Editors rejected current proposed ID submission for JMS URI scheme

• Eric Johnson (Friday, 2 July)

ISSUE-41 (Editors list wrong): Editors list wrong [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 9 July)

ISSUE-42 (Abstract needs improvement): Abstract includes RFC 2119 keyword, fails to mention WSDL [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Monday, 12 July)

ISSUE-43 (Unflagged assertion re all props): Spurious unflagged assertion about all properties in section 2.2 [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Monday, 12 July)

ISSUE-44 (MAY assertion re: props definition): No need to say where a property MAY appear [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Monday, 12 July)

ISSUE-45 (jndiContextParameter has unflagged RFC 2119): jndiContextParameter has unflagged RFC 2119 keywords, at least one is spurious [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Monday, 12 July)

ISSUE-46 (replyToName spurious assertion): replyToName has "SHOULD" assertion about where the message should be sent. [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Monday, 12 July)

ISSUE-47 (topicReplyToName unflagged assertions): topicReplyToName has two unflagged assertions, some inappropriate. [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Thursday, 15 July)

ISSUE-48 (unflagged message body assertions): Unflagged assertions about message body and content type [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-49 (unflagged xml encoding assertion): Unflagged assertion about ignoring XML encoding declaration [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-50 (Missing SOAP 1.1 indication): Apparently redundant statements are about different versions of SOAP [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-51 (redundant assertions about message body): Protocol 2034 & 2040 are redundant normative statements about the message body format [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-52 (bogus RFC 2119 keyword in table describing JMSReplyTo): JMSReplyTo description includes inappropriate use of "must" in section 2.6.1.1 [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-53 (Missing case in transition description): Section 2.6.1.3 missing description of what to do on failure [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-54 (Unflagged SHOULD about JMSDeliveryMode): Unflagged SHOULD about JMSDeliveryMode - not normative [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-55 (redundant statements about one-way MEP): Section 2.7.2 restates constraints laid out in [SOAP 1.2 Part 3: One-Way MEP], and almost certainly shouldn't [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-56 (Unflagged assertion about @transport value): @transport value assertion not flagged, should be [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-57 (Unflagged assertion about JMS destination): @location attribute assertion about being a JMS Destination, but not flagged. [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-58 (References section a big blob): No indication of which references are normative, and which are not, also, inconsistently referring to latest/specific version [SOAP-JMS Test cases]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Friday, 16 July)

ISSUE-59 (Tests for JMSCorrelationID): Since adding Protocol-2038 assertion, we now need test cases for non-null JMSCorrelationID [SOAP-JMS Test cases]

• SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker (Monday, 19 July)

JMS URI formats

• Mark Phillips (Thursday, 8 July)

Minutes 2010-07-06

• Mark Phillips (Wednesday, 7 July)

Minutes 2010-07-13

• Mark Phillips (Tuesday, 13 July)

Minutes 2010-07-27

• Mark Phillips (Wednesday, 28 July)

Moving forward on the JMS URI scheme

• Eric Johnson (Friday, 2 July)

New draft of jms URI scheme

• Eric Johnson (Tuesday, 27 July)

NEW ISSUE: Editors list wrong

• Yves Lafon (Friday, 9 July)
• Eric Johnson (Friday, 9 July)

regrets for today's call

• Phil Adams (Tuesday, 6 July)

Last message date: Wednesday, 28 July 2010 09:09:21 UTC