← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →
Re: [sca-assembly] Groups - sca-assembly-1.1-spec-wd061.doc (sca-assembly-1.1-spec-wd061.doc) uploaded
A related question on the references.
For the Bindings TC, we've had normative references point to a
specific dated version of a specification. We don't appear to have
done that for some of the references from the assembly spec:
For example: WSI-BP - references
http://www.ws-i.org/deliverables/workinggroup.aspx?wg=basicprofile
instead of http://ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.2-2010-11-09.html
Perhaps that's a bad example, because it appears the reference is
now spurious (no text matches to "WSI-BP"), although I do see one
reference in section 6.1 (line 2532).
For all of the OASIS hosted standards, I see that wsbinding
references assembly with
http://docs.oasis-open.org/opencsa/sca-assembly/sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd05.pdf,
whereas the assembly spec only includes a "version free" URL
reference. I'm thinking we might have resolved to do this as a way
to get out of the hopeless entanglement of versions of the SCA
specs, but maybe I'm mistaken?
For the W3C specs, it appears that all of the normative references
are to the "latest" copies, rather than the specific revisions
(WSDL11, XML-INFOSET, WSDL11_Identifiers).
Maybe my PDF searching is failing me, but the following aren't used:
JAX-WS
WSI-BP (not used, but should be, but then could be
non-normative)
WSI-BPS
WS-BPEL (not used, but should be, and non-normative at that)
SCA-C-Client
ZIP-FORMAT
XML-INFOSET (not used, only reference to infoset appears in
the introduction, but perhaps should still reference)
These probably don't need to be normative:
SCA BPEL
SDO
SCA-CPP-Client
General question - shouldn't these references be listed in
alphabetical order?
Before I raise an issue on this, I thought I'd send this email to
see if I'm missing something, but it seems to break into several
points:
References not listed alphabetically
References identified, but then not used, even when they
should be (WS-BPEL, XML-INFOSET)
References identified, but doesn't appear that they're needed
Normative references identify links to versions that can
change over time
At least on the last point, can anyone confirm whether they see this
as a problem? Anyone see the other bullet points as a problem?
-Eric.
On 1/5/11 8:15 AM, Bryan Aupperle wrote:
Any reason not to
update the other SCA
spec references to the latest drafts:
POJO - CSD 3 (Nov. 2010)
CAA - CSD 5 (Nov. 2010)
Policy - CD 4 (Sep. 2010)
JMS Binding - CSD 5 (Nov. 2010)
C++ C&I - CD 6 (Oct. 2010)
C C&I - CD 6 (Oct. 2010)
Admittedly this could be done at
CS
time via Designated Cross References, but why wait?
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
WW Center of Excellence for Enterprise Systems & Banking
Center of
Excellence Application Integration Architect
Research Triangle Park, NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address:
From:
To:
Date:
01/04/2011 09:39 AM
Subject:
[sca-assembly]
Groups - sca-assembly-1.1-spec-wd061.doc
(sca-assembly-1.1-spec-wd061.doc)
uploaded
The document named
sca-assembly-1.1-spec-wd061.doc
(sca-assembly-1.1-spec-wd061.doc) has been submitted by Dr.
Mike Edwards
to
the OASIS Service Component Architecture / Assembly
(SCA-Assembly) TC
document repository.
Document Description:
View Document Details:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=40663
Download Document:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/40663/sca-assembly-1.1-spec-wd061.doc
PLEASE NOTE: If the above links do not work for you, your
email application
may be breaking the link into two pieces. You may be able to
copy
and paste
the entire link address into the address field of your web
browser.
-OASIS Open Administration
← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →