- From: Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 14:55:16 +0100
- To: Mark Phillips <M8PHILLI@uk.ibm.com>
- CC: SOAP-JMS <public-soap-jms@w3.org>
Hi Mark, I might suggest one additional week, at least, because the US has the Thanksgiving holiday in the middle of that time frame. Care to update the document? -Eric. On 11/2/11 2:42 PM, Mark Phillips wrote: > Thanks Eric, I have reviewed this, and the disposition of comments and both > look good. > > One remaining item that I think we need to resolve is the paragraph in the > SOTD [1] which begins "The authors of this document consider it to be > stable". The paragraph ends with the question "(QUESTION: what is the end > of this review period?)." > > In his note on 3rd Oct [2] Yves suggested at least 4 weeks for this review > period - so does December 16th seem reasonable if we publish on November > 15th. > > Regards > Mark > > [1] http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.html#status > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2011Oct/0000.html > > > > > > From: Eric Johnson<eric@tibco.com> > To: SOAP-JMS<public-soap-jms@w3.org> > Date: 01/11/2011 14:24 > Subject: Action-258: (Draft #2) Request to progress to Proposed > Recommendation for SOAP-JMS > > > > SOAP-JMS WG - the following is my 2nd draft of the request to progress > to PR, integrating feedback from Yves. > > Specifically, Yves noted that it would be appropriate to link to: > * a report of issues raised during our Last Call > * declarations of conformance by implementations. > > So I've done so. > > Further comments welcome! > > -Eric > ====================================================================== > > Dear Colleagues, > > The SOAP-JMS Working Group requests transition to Proposed > Recommendation for the SOAP over Java Messaging Service 1.0 specification. > > Document title > -------------- > SOAP over Java Messaging Service 1.0 > > URLs > ---- > Draft: http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.html > Final: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/PR-soapjms-20111108/ > > Abstract > -------- > The abstract can be found at: > http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.html#abstract > > Status > ------ > The status of the document can be found at: > http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.html#status > > Estimated publication date: > --------------------------- > November 15, 2011 > > Records > ------- > Decision to request the transition: > (TBD) > > Significant Changes Since Previous Publication > ---------------------------------------------- > * clarified text around the use of BytesMessage and TextMessage > * added support for "contentEncoding" > * improvements to non-normative text > * miscellaneous editorial changes > > For a complete report, see: > URL-TBD > > Evidence That Documentation Satisfies Group's Requirements > ---------------------------------------------------------- > The background section of the document establishes what the document > aims to define, and links to those portions of the specification: > > http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.html#introduction-background > > > Evidence that Dependencies Have Been Met > ---------------------------------------- > This specification has no normative dependency issues. > > Evidence for Wide Review > ------------------------ > There exist at least four implementations, including at least one open > source implementation. Comments arrived on our public mailing list from > parties previously unknown to members of the WG. > > Evidence that issues have been formally addressed > ------------------------------------------------- > All issues raised on the public mailing list resulted in issues entered > in our tracker, and all issues in the issue tracker have been addressed > to the satisfaction of the person who raised the issue. > > Specifically, you can see our disposition of comments since our last > last public release: > > http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/disposition-of-comments-2011-PR.html > > Implementation Information > -------------------------- > Three implementations have publicly stated that they pass the test suite > defined by the WG. > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2011Aug/0002.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2011Oct/0008.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2011Apr/0003.html > > ... and from the Apache CXF project, over a sequence of emails ... > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/201104.mbox/%3C201104051045.04251.dkulp%40apache.org%3E > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/201104.mbox/%3C4DACB9C1.4080008%40tibco.com%3E > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/201104.mbox/%3C201104191250.00242.dkulp%40apache.org%3E > > > Objections > ---------- > None raised > > Patent disclosures > ------------------ > None > > > Eric Johnson, > Chair, SOAP-JMS working group > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 2 November 2011 13:58:26 UTC