Re: ACTION-124: Status section for WS-Policy Primer

+1

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Software Group Standards Strategy
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/chrisferris
phone: +1 508 377 9295

public-ws-policy-request@w3.org wrote on 10/09/2006 08:30:53 PM:

> ACTION-124
> Paul and Chris to draft status section and proposed ednotes for 
> Primer referencing pending work on guidelines and possible issue 
> resolutions resulting in content being moved. etc
> http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicy/actions/124
> 
> Personally I think the following status section based on what we 
> used for the first Framework WD is completely okay.  It explicitly 
states:
> a)    that the document is a transcription of the original contribution
> b)    that the WG has not yet agreed with all the material
> c)    ?publication is not endorsement?
> 
> ===
> Status of this Document
> This section describes the status of this document at the time of 
> its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list
> of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this 
> technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/.
> This is the First Public Working Draft of the Web Services Policy 1.
> 5 - Primer specification. This Working Draft was produced by the 
> members of the Web Services Policy Working Group. The Working Group 
> has not yet decided if it will advance this Working Draft to 
> Recommendation Status. It represents a transcription of the original 
> contribution into the W3C style. 
> Note that this Working Draft does not necessarily represent a 
> consensus of the Working Group.  Discussion of this document takes 
> place on the public public-ws-policy@w3.org mailing list (public archive
> ) and within Bugzilla. Comments on this specification should be made
> following the Description for Issues of the Working Group.
> Publication as a Working Draft does not imply endorsement by the W3C
> Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or
> obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to 
> cite this document as other than work in progress.
> This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February
> 2004 W3C Patent Policy. W3C maintains a public list of any patent 
disclosures
> made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page 
> also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual 
> who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes 
contains 
> Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with 
> section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.
> 
> If any addition words are needed then I would suggest the following 
> additional text in the second paragraph before the last sentence:
> 
> Several issues have already been filed on this document and are recorded 
in 
> Bugzilla.  The WG has not yet considered these issues and how they 
> relate to the Working Group?s plans to publish another document 
> current entitled ?Guidelines for Policy Assertion Authors?.
> 
> /paulc
> 
> PS: Note that the Bugzilla hyperlinks are searches that explicitly 
> return only Primer issues.
> 
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
> mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
> > Sent: October 5, 2006 10:16 PM
> > To: Paul Cotton
> > Cc: Christopher B Ferris
> > Subject: RE: Template for status section
> > 
> > > Your attachment was missing.
> > 
> > hoops, sorry. Here it is.
> > 
> > >
> > > /paulc
> > >
> > > Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> > > 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> > > Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
> > > mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
> > >> Sent: October 5, 2006 12:29 AM
> > >> To: Paul Cotton; chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> > >> Subject: Template for status section
> > >>
> > >> Hi Paul, Chris,
> > >>
> > >> Attached is my template to the status section. It contains an 
entity
> > >> call
> > >> for &primer.title; , so it is not well-formed as is.
> > >>
> > >> Be aware that it contains the expectation "The Working Group 
expects to
> > >> advance this Working Draft to Recommendation Status.", although the
> > >> Working Group has not decided this yet.
> > >>
> > >> Regarding our action item
> > >> [[Felix Paul and Chris to draft status section and proposed ednotes 
for
> > >> Primer referencing pending work on guidelines and possible issue
> > >> resolutions resulting in content being moved. etc [recorded in
> > >> http://www.w3.org/2006/10/04-ws-policy-minutes.html#action06]]]
> > >> I was fine with what Paul proposed: "how about the text saying the
> > final
> > >> location of the text will depend on the resolution of this issue". 
But
> > I
> > >> would also propose to mention the guidelines document explicitely. 
I
> > >> know
> > >> that this is dangerous since the Working Group has not yet approved 
to
> > >> produce the guidelines. But it would help to get Umits and Maryanns
> > >> agreement.
> > >> For the AI part "proposed ednotes", I would add such an ednote in 
each
> > >> section which has a separate issue: sec. 4 (issue 3792), sec. 3 
(3794),
> > >> sec. 2.4 (3795).
> > >>
> > >> These are just proposals for discussion.
> > >>
> > >> Felix
> > >
> > >