- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:12:25 -0500
- To: "Thompson, Bryan B." <BRYAN.B.THOMPSON@saic.com>
- Cc: "'David Orchard '" <dorchard@bea.com>, "'www-ws-arch@w3.org '" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
On Feb 16, 2004, at 7:11 AM, Thompson, Bryan B. wrote: > I would go with "strong need for normative notation" for at > least marking "safe" operations. I don't see how this fits with my comment. Does it have to be in the core spec? Produced by this group at this time? Who's the audience? Who's the in group champion? Who will write test cases and software to show conformance? Who will write the specese? If y'all are interested in something happening, we should move this over to www-ws-desc. Personally, I still favor getting a Working Group note out, building an experienced community of practice, then rec tracking. I generally favor rec tracking this in a separate document. I note that even on this list, aside from me who has no vested interest, there isn't consensus that makring safe operations is even needed, much less how it should work. Cheers, Bijan Parsia.
Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 11:12:32 UTC