public-ws-addressing@w3.org from January 2005 by author

Anish Karmarkar

• New issue -- wsdl specific things in core (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Issue i020, subissue 3 proposal (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Issue i020 -- restate the subissues in issue i020 (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Alternatives for resolving subissue 1 in issue i017 (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Issue i017 - Purpose of the Action property -- my action item (Monday, 10 January)
• Re: Issue i017 - Purpose of the Action property -- my action item (Monday, 10 January)
• Alternatives for resolving subissue 1 in issue i017 (Monday, 10 January)
• Strawman proposal -- operation name mapping for issue i017 (Tuesday, 4 January)
• Issue 017: new description and sub-issues (Monday, 3 January)

Ashok Malhotra

• RE: Snapshots of the drafts for review (Friday, 28 January)

Bergersen, Rebecca

• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)

Bob Freund

• RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)

Christopher B Ferris

• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: Alternatives for resolving subissue 1 in issue i017 (Monday, 10 January)

David Orchard

• RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Issue #1 proposed resolution (Sunday, 16 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Wednesday, 12 January)

Doug Davis

• Re: Issue i009 - Multiple actions. Proposal (Thursday, 20 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Sunday, 16 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Thursday, 13 January)

Francisco Curbera

• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Tuesday, 25 January)
• NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: issue 1 on editor's copy (Tuesday, 25 January)
• issue 1 on editor's copy (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: xml:id and opacity of refp's (Thursday, 6 January)
• Re: xml:id and opacity of refp's (Wednesday, 5 January)
• issue 038 - my action item (Wednesday, 5 January)
• Re: i014 - Metadata Update/Reconciliation: a proposal (Monday, 3 January)

Glen Daniels

• NEW ISSUE : Extensibility model needs a little fleshing out (processing model, understand/ignore semantics) (Sunday, 16 January)

Greg Truty

• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• i022 - Relationship to the SOAP binding framework (summary) (Sunday, 16 January)

Harris Reynolds

• RE: EPR to UDDI Mapping (Thursday, 20 January)
• RE: EPR to UDDI Mapping (Wednesday, 19 January)
• i041: Testing Template (Monday, 10 January)

Hugo Haas

• Re: Snapshots of the drafts for review (Friday, 28 January)
• Snapshots of the drafts for review (Friday, 28 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• NEW ISSUE: Definition of the rules to reply to a message in Core 3.2 (Monday, 17 January)
• Issue 040: Processing Model for our SOAP Faults (Monday, 17 January)
• Issue i021 WSDL Extension for Addressing: status and discussion on requirements (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: i014 - Metadata Update/Reconciliation: a proposal (Monday, 10 January)
• Re: Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-01-10 (Monday, 10 January)
• Issue i001: what and how many things are we identifying? (Monday, 10 January)

Husband, Yin-Leng

• Review of WS-Chor (Friday, 14 January)

Jonathan Marsh

• RE: NEW ISSUE: Comparison of URIs used as identifiers. [i046] (Monday, 31 January)
• NEW ISSUE: [relationship] Order of URI pairs is ambiguous (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: Comparison of URIs used as identifiers. (Wednesday, 19 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: Action defaults don't work with URNs. (Monday, 17 January)
• Agenda, 19 Jan 2005 joint WS Description, WS Addressing FTF meeting (Monday, 17 January)
• NEW ISSUE: Comparison of URIs used as identifiers. (Friday, 14 January)
• NEW ISSUE: Action defaults don't work with URNs. (Friday, 14 January)
• i035: unique action values for faults (Friday, 14 January)
• RE: Issue 6 (Message Property Optionality) (Monday, 10 January)
• RE: Issue 6 (Message Property Optionality) (Friday, 7 January)
• RE: Problems with the SOAP binding (Monday, 3 January)

Marc Hadley

• Re: Proposed resolution for issues 24 (metadata) and 26 (multiple ports) (Monday, 31 January)
• Issue 15 - Redirection (Thursday, 27 January)
• NEW ISSUE: Absolute vs relative URIs (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-01-24 (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Comparison of refps (Monday, 17 January)
• Issue 6 proposal rework (Monday, 17 January)
• NEW ISSUE: Comparison of refps (Monday, 17 January)
• Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Wednesday, 12 January)
• SOAP Detail Element Question (Tuesday, 11 January)
• Re: Issue 6 (Message Property Optionality) (Monday, 10 January)
• Re: i022: Relationship to the SOAP Binding Framework: a SOAP Request MEP and OneWay HTTP Binding (Thursday, 6 January)
• Re: xml:id and opacity of refp's (Wednesday, 5 January)
• Re: xml:id and opacity of refp's (Wednesday, 5 January)

Mark Baker

• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Action defaults don't work with URNs. (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE; wsa:To interaction with application protocols (Monday, 3 January)

Mark Little

• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Sunday, 30 January)
• Re: Issue i009 - Multiple actions. Proposal (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Issue i009 - Multiple actions. Proposal (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Wednesday, 19 January)

Mark Nottingham

• Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-01-31 (Saturday, 29 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers [i048] (Saturday, 29 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Absolute vs relative URIs [i047] (Saturday, 29 January)
• Fwd: IRI and updated URI specs published as RFC 3987, RFC 3986 (STD 66) (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: issue 1 on editor's copy (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Minutes of the 2005-01-24 telconference (Monday, 24 January)
• Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-01-24 (Saturday, 22 January)
• Minutes of the 2005-01-[17,18,19] Melbourne F2F (Friday, 21 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Comparison of URIs used as identifiers. [i046] (Friday, 21 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Action defaults don't work with URNs. [i045] (Friday, 21 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Definition of the rules to reply to a message in Core 3.2 [i044] (Friday, 21 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Comparison of refps [i043] (Friday, 21 January)
• Agenda: 2005-01-17 F2F, Melbourne, VIC AU (Thursday, 13 January)
• Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-01-10 (Saturday, 8 January)
• Agenda: 2005-01-17 F2F, Melbourne, VIC AU [DRAFT] (Thursday, 6 January)
• Minutes of the 2005-01-03 teleconference (Monday, 3 January)
• Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-01-03 (Monday, 3 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE; wsa:To interaction with application protocols (Monday, 3 January)
• Re: Issue i017 - Purpose of the Action property -- my action item (Saturday, 1 January)

Martin Gudgin

• RE: Action related to i043 (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: Action related to i043 (Monday, 31 January)
• Action related to i043 (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: issue 1 on editor's copy (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: Issue i009 - Multiple actions. Proposal (Thursday, 20 January)
• Issue i009 - Multiple actions. Proposal (Thursday, 20 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: Comparison of refps (Monday, 17 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Friday, 14 January)
• Interesting commentary on EPRs (Friday, 14 January)
• RE: Problems with the SOAP binding (Wednesday, 5 January)

Michael McIntosh

• Re: Problems with the SOAP binding (Wednesday, 5 January)

noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

• Re: Issue i001: what and how many things are we identifying? (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: EPR to UDDI Mapping (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Comparison of URIs used as identifiers. (Friday, 14 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Wednesday, 12 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Tuesday, 11 January)

paul.downey@bt.com

• i009 - processingStyle proposal (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: Snapshots of the drafts for review (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• problems faced by ws-addr with WSDL 2.0 extensibility (Wednesday, 19 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: Action defaults don't work with URNs. (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Wednesday, 12 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Wednesday, 12 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Monday, 10 January)

Philippe Le Hegaret

• Minutes 20050110 (Tuesday, 11 January)

Rich Salz

• Re: Action related to i043 (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: Action related to i043 (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Saturday, 29 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: i043 comparison of refps (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Thursday, 20 January)
• ACTION 2004-12-20: Security of wrapper vs attribute (Monday, 10 January)
• Re: xml:id and opacity of refp's (Thursday, 6 January)
• Re: xml:id and opacity of refp's (Thursday, 6 January)
• Re: Problems with the SOAP binding (Wednesday, 5 January)
• Re: Problems with the SOAP binding (Monday, 3 January)

Rogers, Tony

• RE: NEW ISSUE: [relationship] Order of URI pairs is ambiguous (Monday, 31 January)

Savas Parastatidis

• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Thursday, 27 January)
• RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Thursday, 20 January)
• RE: Issue i009 - Multiple actions. Proposal (Thursday, 20 January)
• RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: Action defaults don't work with URNs. (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Thursday, 13 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Thursday, 13 January)
• RE: xml:id and opacity of refp's (Thursday, 6 January)

Srinivas, Davanum M

• RE: i041: Testing Template (Monday, 10 January)
• RE: Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-01-03 (Monday, 3 January)

Stuart Williams

• New TAG Issue: endPointRef-47 (was Re: New issue; WS-Addressing SOAP binding & app protocols) (Wednesday, 26 January)

Tim Ewald

• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Monday, 17 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Friday, 14 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Friday, 14 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Friday, 14 January)
• RE: Issue 7 - processing model for SOAP headers (Thursday, 13 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Thursday, 13 January)
• RE: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Wednesday, 12 January)

Tom Rutt

• Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Sunday, 16 January)
• Re: i009 - mustIgnore rule for multiple To, ReplyTo, etc. (Wednesday, 12 January)
• Re: Issue i001: what and how many things are we identifying? (Wednesday, 12 January)

Ugo Corda

• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers [i048] (Saturday, 29 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution (Thursday, 20 January)
• RE: xml:id and opacity of refp's (Thursday, 6 January)

Vikas Deolaliker

• RE: Proposed resolution for issues 24 (metadata) and 26 (multiple ports) (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: EPR to UDDI Mapping (Thursday, 20 January)
• EPR to UDDI Mapping (Wednesday, 19 January)

Vinoski, Stephen

• Proposed resolution for issues 24 (metadata) and 26 (multiple ports) (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: EPR to UDDI Mapping (Thursday, 20 January)

Yalcinalp, Umit

• RE: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: Alternatives for resolving subissue 1 in issue i017 (Monday, 10 January)

Last message date: Monday, 31 January 2005 23:33:26 UTC