Lists Home |
Date Index |
I am speaking from outside the authorship of the GXA specs.
One GXA specification - WS-Security - is currently being developed under
OASIS. Two others - DIME and WS-Attachments - are within IETF. The rest
are "property of" their respective authors. My hope is that more GXA
specs will move into open consortiums (hopefully OASIS) in the near
future, and pass through the open standards process as quickly as
possible as well. They are (in my opinion) wonderful specifications,
and I firmly believe that pushing them all through an open standards
process will be a *critical factor* for the future success of GXA.
So if you need a reliable messaging policy, I believe your best bet
right now is to track the WS-Reliability spec and the OASIS Web Services
Reliable Messaging (WSRM) TC , as it is already within an open
standards process (I am a member of this TC). I don't have exact
timeframes yet, but will probably have a better idea in the near future.
Hope that helps,
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> Does anyone know what the status or process of the GXA specifications are?
> They're officially published by Microsoft et al, and generally refered to
> as 'standards', but is there anything like a review/endorsement process in
> The WS-ReliableMessaging specification index page  says:
> WS-ReliableMessaging was published as a public specification on 13 March
> 2003. This is the first joint BEA/IBM/Microsoft/TIBCO Software publication
> of the specification.'
> What does that mean, exactly: 'public specification'?
> I've come across some issues regarding the WS-ReliableMessaging
> specification that I feel compelled to report to the powers that be.
> However, apart from the names and companies in the author list I can't
> figure out who or what those powers may be. The spec hasn't, afaik, been
> submitted to any standards organisation and with OASIS already
> having a Reliable Messaging TC in place it seems somehow unlikely that it
> ever will.
> The spec itself  says:
> WS-ReliableMessaging and related specifications are provided for use as-is
> and for review and evaluation only. BEA, IBM, Microsoft, and TIBCO
> Software will solicit your contributions and suggestions in the near
> future. BEA, IBM, Microsoft, and TIBCO Software make no warrantees or
> representations regarding the specification in any manner whatsoever.'
> So they'll accept comments 'in the near future'?
> Meanwhile, I'm in a position where I _need_ a reliable messaging policy
> even if I have to write it myself, and I'm sure many analysts and
> developers on WS projects are in the same situation.
> It would be nice to know what the plan is with the various specifications
> that are floating about. At least with OASIS one knows what the process
> is, and that there's a TC to which comments can be submitted  (whether
> they read them is another question!), so there's some sort of assurance
> that problems will be dealt with.
> Anyone clued up on the mysterious ways of the GXA?
> ps I've asked some of these questions before but didn't get any replies,
> I'm sure someone on the list must know. (Whether they're allowed to
> discuss what they know is a different issue..!)
> Martin Klang
> http://www.o-xml.org - the object-oriented XML programming language
>  http://msdn.microsoft.com/webservices/understanding/gxa/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnglobspec/html/wsrmspecindex.asp
>  http://msdn.microsoft.com/webservices/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnglobspec/html/ws-reliablemessaging.asp
>  mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team
adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012;
fn:Joseph M. Chiusano