W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > January 2003

RE: where are we?

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 05:43:58 -0800
Message-ID: <330564469BFEC046B84E591EB3D4D59C092AB11D@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

(1) There is a lot of interest in removing message along the lines that
Roberto has proposed.  However, there is concern that this might make
the bindings more complicated, or at least eliminate shortcuts a binding
could take (HTTP GET binding parts as parameters, for instance).  We're
working up some detailed examples.  My impression is that if nothing
nasty turns up the proposal has a good chance of being accepted.

(2) We have a full game plan on MEPs now - we adopted changes into the
syntax and component model, and decided which MEPs we would provide and
document (7).  My belief is that this issue is pretty much settled,
modulo a lot of new text that needs to be created and reviewed.

(3) Basically, zero progress at FTF.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:36 PM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: where are we?
> Hi Guys,
> There are three big issues that are in my mind that I was hoping
> would get resolved or directed at this last F2F. They are:
> (1) What to do about <message>
> (2) What to do about message-exchange/interaction patterns and
>     outbound operations as a result of that decision
> (3) Some direction for the features/properties (and context/policy)
>     stuff
> I can see from the minutes that (3) got deferred; which makes fine
> sense to me. I cannot quite tell whether no meaningful progress
> was made for (1) and (2) or whether we have some direction on
> those. Can someone please help me understand the status?
> Thanks,
> Sanjiva.
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2003 08:44:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:27 UTC