Re: [ws-caf] next set of issues

Mark Little wrote:

> Given what was decided yesterday, it seems like issue 16 should be 
> closed as it is covered by issue 45.
>  
> Mark.
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Mark Little <mailto:>
>     *To:* 
>     <mailto:>
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2004 4:02 PM
>     *Subject:* [ws-caf] next set of issues
>
>     Concentrating on general and WS-Context issues for now, I want to
>     propose we try to tidy up the following issues:
>      
>     12
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12>
>     nor 	P2 	All 	
>     <mailto:> 	NEW 		clarify reply-to address in
>     schema (and possibly the text)
>     13
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=13>
>     maj 	P2 	All 	
>     <mailto:> 	NEW 		UserActivityServicePortType
>     the "completionStatus" operat...
>     14
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=14>
>     nor 	P2 	All 	 	NEW 		StatusType is a
>     restriction but is extended in WS-TXM. Is...
>     15
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=15>
>     cri 	P2 	All 	 	NEW 		CompleteWithStatus has
>     the wrong type
>     16
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=16>
>     nor 	P2 	All 	 	NEW 		None of the WS-CAF
>     schemas are WSI BP compliant.
>     17
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=17>
>     nor 	P2 	All 	 	NEW 		wsc4c is referenced in
>     parts of WS-CF schema. Is it elsew...
>     18
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=18>
>     maj 	P2 	All 	 	NEW 		Incorrect WSDL import
>     statement.
>     19
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=19>
>     cri 	P2 	All 	 	NEW 		No "part" attribute.
>     20
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=20>
>     nor 	P2 	All 	 	NEW 		Missing portType
>     operations
>
>      
>     In line with something Alastair (I think) mentioned yesterday
>     about possible sharing implications of context, this came up at
>     the face-to-face and is
>      
>     46
>     <http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=46>
>     nor 	P2 	All 	 	NEW 		Context sharing
>
>      
>     So maybe we want to discuss it too, though I suspect it won't be
>     resolved quickly.
>      
>     Mark.
>
Mark,
Bug # 45 was regarding which version of the BP to use.  16 on the other
hand claims that the files are not compliant.  Even though we've agreed
to use BP 1.0 (or whichever version is publicly available), I have not
completed the work to make the wsdls BP compliant yet so I think we
should leave 16 open.  Agree?

-Simeon