xml-dist-app@w3.org from October 2002 by date

Thursday, 31 October 2002

• Requirements check, sections 4.6 and 4.7 Jacek Kopecky

Wednesday, 30 October 2002

• Issue 392: revised proposal Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Resolution of Issue 359 John Ibbotson
• RE: Yet another proposal for issue 355 Martin Gudgin
• Yet another proposal for issue 355 Martin Gudgin
• Proposed resolution text for Issue 359 John Ibbotson

Tuesday, 29 October 2002

• Re: Issue 294 Proposed resolution - mark II David Fallside
• Updated proposal for Issue 355 ( and 262 ) Martin Gudgin
• Issue 392: draft proposals Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Updates to feature list based on disposition of Last Call issues Champion, Mike

Monday, 28 October 2002

• Proposal for Issue 385 (AF conformance clause) Camilo Arbelaez

Tuesday, 29 October 2002

• FW: Proposal for Issue 385 (AF conformance clause) Camilo Arbelaez
• Additions to Usage Scenarios John Ibbotson
• RE: Proposal for Issue 385 (AF conformance clause) Camilo Arbelaez
• Re: Proposal for issue 394: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for issue 394: Some unprocessed headers should stay noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for issue 390 Christopher B Ferris
• RE: Proposal for issue 390 David Orchard
• Issue 388 Proposed Resolution Marc Hadley
• Re: Issue 392: any one remembers? David Fallside
• Issue 294 Proposed resolution - mark II Marc Hadley

Monday, 28 October 2002

• Issue 392: any one remembers? Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Forwarding table Jean-Jacques Moreau
• RE: Text for issue 300/359 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen

Sunday, 27 October 2002

• RE: Use of XML Messaging in Multicasting? Abhishek
• Re: Proposal for issue 390 Christopher B Ferris
• Proposal for issue 390 Carine Bournez
• RE: Use of XML Messaging in Multicasting? Eugene Kuznetsov
• Use of XML Messaging in Multicasting? Abhishek

Friday, 25 October 2002

• Alternate SOAP 1.2 email binding Don Mullen
• proposal for issue 391 (how IDREF URIs are dereferenced) Nilo Mitra (EUS)
• Proposal for issue 394: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau

Thursday, 24 October 2002

• RE: proposal for issue 393 (concrete packaging spec) David Orchard
• Re: proposal for issue 393 (concrete packaging spec) John J. Barton
• proposal for issue 393 (concrete packaging spec) Mark Jones

Wednesday, 23 October 2002

• Re: Proposal for SOAP 1.2 LC-Issue 371: Multiple Choice Assertions Jean-Jacques Moreau

Tuesday, 22 October 2002

• Re: Question regarding uniqueness of soap Fault in body noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for SOAP 1.2 LC-Issue 371: Multiple Choice Assertions noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for SOAP 1.2 LC-Issue 371: Multiple Choice Assertions Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Proposal for SOAP 1.2 LC-Issue 371: Multiple Choice Assertions noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Monday, 21 October 2002

• Proposal for SOAP 1.2 LC-Issue 371: Multiple Choice Assertions Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headersshould stay Graham Klyne
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headersshould stay Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky

Friday, 18 October 2002

• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Nilo Mitra (EUS)
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Marc Hadley
• RE: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Proposed Resolution: Issue 294 - "message exchange context out of nowhere?" Marc Hadley
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Martin Gudgin
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Martin Gudgin
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Martin Gudgin
• RE: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Marc Hadley
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headersshould stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• IMPLEMENTERS NOTE: Re: updated implementation summary David Fallside
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: updated implementation summary Jean-Jacques Moreau
• updated implementation summary Yves Lafon
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Marc Hadley
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headersshould stay Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Issues 368 and 369 Proposal Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Issue 389 proposal Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headersshould stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Issue 389 proposal Herve Ruellan
• [AF] Proposal for Issue 387 Herve Ruellan
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• [AF] Proposal for issue 386 resolution Herve Ruellan
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Issues 368 and 369 Proposal noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Thursday, 17 October 2002

• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headersshould stay Bob Cunnings
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headersshould stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Issue 389 proposal Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• Text for issue 300/359 gdaniels@macromedia.com
• FYI: WS-I Basic Profile Working Group Draft published Christopher B Ferris
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Text for issue 300/359 Glen Daniels
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Herve Ruellan
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 1 Herve Ruellan

Wednesday, 16 October 2002

• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Graham Klyne

Thursday, 17 October 2002

• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms Rich Salz

Wednesday, 16 October 2002

• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Mark Baker
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Martin Gudgin
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed header s should stay Nilo Mitra (EUS)
• Re: SOAP intermediaries (Some unprocessed headers should stay) noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Marc Hadley
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Proposal for issue 277 - part 1 Marc Hadley
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Nilo Mitra (EUS)
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Nilo Mitra (EUS)
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Yves Lafon
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Marc Hadley
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Question regarding uniqueness of soap Fault in body Jacek Kopecky
• SOAP intermediaries (Some unprocessed headers should stay) Graham Klyne

Tuesday, 15 October 2002

• Question regarding uniqueness of soap Fault in body Ed Roskos
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay Graham Klyne

Monday, 14 October 2002

• Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Issues 368 and 369 Proposal noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Issues 368 and 369 Proposal David Fallside
• Proposal for Issue 363 - RPC return accessor Asir S Vedamuthu
• Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Herve Ruellan
• Proposal for issue 277 - part 1 Herve Ruellan
• Issue 367 Proposal John Ibbotson
• Issues 368 and 369 Proposal John Ibbotson

Friday, 11 October 2002

• Anybody alive? since I haven't received any mail for a long period of time. Collin

Wednesday, 9 October 2002

• RE: Issue 364 proposal Asir S Vedamuthu
• RE: Issue 364 proposal Martin Gudgin
• Issue 364 proposal Jacek Kopecky
• Possibly editorial problem in Data Model and Encoding Jacek Kopecky

Tuesday, 8 October 2002

• Re: Are gateways SOAP intermediaries? Jean-Jacques Moreau

Monday, 7 October 2002

• Re: Proposal for issue 327 Ray Whitmer
• Re: Proposal for issue 327 David Fallside
• Re: Proposal for issue 327 Ray Whitmer
• RE: Proposal for issue 327 Champion, Mike
• Re: Proposed resolution on using schemas to default itemType and nodeClass (subissue of 231) Ray Whitmer
• Re: Proposal for issue 327 Ray Whitmer
• Re: Are gateways SOAP intermediaries? Mark Baker
• Re: Are gateways SOAP intermediaries? Marc Hadley
• RE: Are gateways SOAP intermediaries? Henrik Frystyk Nielsen

Friday, 4 October 2002

• WWW2003 Call for Papers Vinoski, Stephen
• SOAP 1.2 Specification and confusion around Subcode Ed.Morassut@bmo.com
• Welcome to my hometown PGoel

Thursday, 3 October 2002

• RE: Proposal for issue 327 Champion, Mike
• Proposal for issue 327 David Fallside

Tuesday, 1 October 2002

• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms Rich Salz
• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms Rich Salz
• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms Marc Hadley
• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for various Infosetisms Martin Gudgin
• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms Marc Hadley
• RE: Proposal for various Infosetisms Martin Gudgin
• Re: Proposal for various Infosetisms Marc Hadley
• RE: Proposal for various Infosetisms noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for various Infosetisms noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Proposal for various Infosetisms Rich Salz
• RE: Proposal for various Infosetisms Martin Gudgin

Last message date: Thursday, 31 October 2002 14:30:02 UTC