Status of WSDL 2.0 Maintenance WG

[Arthur Ryman-2]

I understand that a new WG will be set up to maintain various WS specs, including WSDL 2.0 and the Test Suite. What's the status? We have a couple of Test Suite updates to make.

Arthur Ryman, PhD, AoT, DE
Process and Portfolio Management, Rational Division

phone: [phone], TL 969-3077
assistant: [phone] (T/L: 318-8867)
fax: [phone], TL 969-4920
mobile: [phone], text: 4169395063@...

[Philippe Le Hegaret]

On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 11:05 -0400, Arthur Ryman wrote:
>
> I understand that a new WG will be set up to maintain various WS
> specs, including WSDL 2.0 and the Test Suite. What's the status? We
> have a couple of Test Suite updates to make.

Hello Arthur,

Hopefully things are doing well for you (besides the maintenance of
WSDL).

I'm expecting the Group to be officially by the end of the month.
Questions related to the operating mode of the Group with regards to the
W3C Patent Policy arised during the review and we've been (slowly)
working at addressing them.

Philippe

[Jeff Mischkinsky]

hi philippe,
  I'd be interested to know what and when questions related to the  
operating mode were raised. I don't recall seeing any discussion on  
the ac-forum lists, and i just scanned the archives since july. I see  
only a few statements of support and question if/how new RECs would  
be added to the scope of the maintenance WG as the other WS WGs  
finish their work.
    cheers,
    jeff

On Oct 18, 2007, at 12:06 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:

>
> On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 11:05 -0400, Arthur Ryman wrote:
>>
>> I understand that a new WG will be set up to maintain various WS
>> specs, including WSDL 2.0 and the Test Suite. What's the status? We
>> have a couple of Test Suite updates to make.
>
> Hello Arthur,
>
> Hopefully things are doing well for you (besides the maintenance of
> WSDL).
>
> I'm expecting the Group to be officially by the end of the month.
> Questions related to the operating mode of the Group with regards  
> to the
> W3C Patent Policy arised during the review and we've been (slowly)
> working at addressing them.
>
> Philippe
>
>
>

--
Jeff Mischkinsky           jeff.mischkinsky@...
Director, Oracle Fusion Middleware and Web Services Standards +1(650)
506-1975
Consulting Member Technical Staff           500 Oracle Parkway, M/
S 4OP9
Oracle Redwood Shores, CA 94065

[Philippe Le Hegaret]

On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 12:54 -0700, Jeff Mischkinsky wrote:
>   I'd be interested to know what and when questions related to the  
> operating mode were raised. I don't recall seeing any discussion on  
> the ac-forum lists, and i just scanned the archives since july.

The issue was raised during the AC review of the charter. The review
wasn't copied to the AC forum.

>  I see  
> only a few statements of support and question if/how new RECs would  
> be added to the scope of the maintenance WG as the other WS WGs  
> finish their work.

Let me add that the commenter who raised the issue also supported the
proposal whether or not his proposed changes are adopted. Effectively,
we did receive unanimous support to move the charter as-is. However, the
Team felt that the issue was raising an interesting twist that needed to
be addressed before being able to move further. We didn't want to make
the Web Services Core an exception in the W3C.

In order to address the issue, we decided to clarify the status of the
Group by p[ublishing FAQ entries. One of them has been published (#37):
 http://www.w3.org/2003/12/22-pp-faq#edlicensing

We are (hopefully) getting close to a resolution on a new FAQ entry:
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-psig/2007OctDec/0016.html
 (W3C Member only link)

Once the FAQ entry #38 is published, we will be in a position to move
forward on the Web Services Core charter and announced it. So, unless
there is a new twist, we should be able to announce the WS Core group in
early November.

Philippe