RE: MOAP is checked

Wu,
  when you refer to the "checked in new version", did you mean the stuff 
in the attachment I sent or the version here: 
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/edcopies/wseventing.html  ?

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.



"Chou, Wu (Wu)" <wuchou@avaya.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
03/29/2010 10:52 AM

To
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
cc
"Li, Li (Li)" <lli5@avaya.com>, <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Subject
RE: MOAP is checked






Doug,
 
The checked in new version looks good. You made a good point, and I agree 
that we should leave the stuff in parens as it is.
 
Many thanks,
 
- Wu Chou.

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 5:31 PM
To: Chou, Wu (Wu)
Cc: Li, Li (Li); public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: RE: MOAP is checked


Wu, 
  some of the edits are fine but others change the meaning quite a bit. In 
particular you changed: 

By doing so the endpoint is indicating that the corresponding WS-Eventing 
operations are supported by that endpoint even though they do not 
explicitly appear in its WSDL (ie. the WS-Eventing operations do not 
appear in the WSDL that MAY be retrievable by using WS-MetadataExchange 
GetWSDL to that endpoint). 
to: 
By doing so the endpoint is indicating that the corresponding WS-Eventing 
operations are supported by that endpoint even though they are implicit 
and do not explicitly appear in its WSDL (i.e. the WS-Eventing operations 
that do not appear in the WSDL MAY be retrievable by using 
WS-MetadataExchange GetWSDL to that endpoint). 

Its the stuff in parens that worries me.  The new wording could be taken 
to imply that some WS-Eventing ops might appear in the WSDL while others 
may not and that would be bad.   I think I'm ok with most of the other 
edits, but I'd prefer to leave the stuff in parens as is.  I've attached a 
new version with just the first assertion's edits - the other assertions 
(in all specs) would follow the same pattern. 



thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog. 


"Chou, Wu (Wu)" <wuchou@avaya.com> 
03/16/2010 03:20 PM 


To
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS 
cc
<public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>, "Li, Li (Li)" <lli5@avaya.com> 
Subject
RE: MOAP is checked








Doug, 
  
Here is a change marked word file of Section 9, which incorporates some of 
the discussions so far and changes at word level on how to state these 
requirements. It is rough and attached here intended for in formation and 
further discussion. 
  
Thanks, 
  
- Wu Chou.[attachment "WS-Eventing-Section 9_marked_wu.doc" deleted by 
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM]