RE: WS-Resource-Access FPWG

What about adding a note to the WS specs saying what the
reservations are? So that even if they publish stuff the
TAG origin might not like, we can limit the scope the damage?

Larry


-----Original Message-----
From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
ashok malhotra
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 4:58 PM
To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
Cc: www-tag@w3.org; Bob Freund
Subject: Re: WS-Resource-Access FPWG

Personally, I think we should just let this go.  The TAG has bigger fish 
to fry.

If we do want to ask for something, we should ask WS-RA to define what 
happens if you send
an http GET to the URI in an EPR.  The answer should not be a 404 or a 
SOAP message.

All the best, Ashok


noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
> I chatted with Bob a bit at the AC meeting this week.   We all know that 
> there have been some reservations on the part of individual TAG members 
> about about aspects of either WS-RA itself, or the ways in which WS-RA 
> uses technologies like WS-Addressing.  In particular, I've heard concerns 
> expressed about the extent to which WS-RA re-implements HTTP at a 
> different level and the stack, and also the possibility that WS-RA might 
> encourage the use of WSA reference parameters for identification.  If the 
> TAG does intend to raise such concerns against WS-RA formally, Bob 
> requests that we do so earlier rather than later.
>
> So, I would appreciate it if other TAG members would let me know whether 
> they wish to schedule discussion of such concerns.  I will collect 
> responses and, based on them, decide about discussion scheduling.   If I 
> get no such responses, I will (after doublechecking with the TAG) confirm 
> to Bob that we do not currently expect to raise such issues against WS-RA.

> Thank you.
>
> Noah
>
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn 
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob Freund <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
> Sent by: www-tag-request@w3.org
> 03/23/2009 04:27 PM
>  
>         To:     www-tag@w3.org
>         cc:     public-ws-resource-access-comments@w3.org, (bcc: Noah 
> Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)
>         Subject:        WS-Resource-Access FPWG
>
>
> Dear TAG
> The WS-Resource-Access working group, on 2009-03-17 published the FPWD 
> of five specifications and has begun public review:
> WS-Transfer[1]
> WS-Resource-Transfer[2]
> WS-Eventing[3]
> WS-Enumeration[4]
> WS-Metadata-Exchange[5]
>
> Emails to all known groups in several organizations that may have an 
> interest in these specifications will be sent in the near future.
>
> Prior to the start of the WS-Resource-Access working group, a TAG 
> resolution[6] was published expressing concerns about several details 
> of some of these specifications, especially WS-Transfer.   Since the 
> WG is now under way, and on a tight nominal schedule, it would benefit 
> all involved if issues that might arise from your review were to be 
> created earlier rather than later.  It is my hope that all issues that 
> might be raised against fundamental aspects of any of these 
> specifications be created before Last Call if at all possible.
> To that end, would the TAG please respond with specific issues of 
> concern that in the opinion of the TAG need to be resolved in these 
> specifications at its earliest convenience.
> In any case, a response with issues, or a statement of no-issues would 
> be appreciated.
>
> thanks
> Bob Freund
> Chair, WS-Resource-Access Working Group
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-transfer-20090317/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-resource-transfer-20090317/
> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-eventing-20090317/
> [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-enumeration-20090317/
> [5] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-metadata-exchange-20090317/
> [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Nov/0008.html
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 04:18:40 UTC