Either is fine with me
thanks
-Doug
________________________________________________________
STSM | Standards Architect | IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 |
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.
Jacques Durand ---09/22/2014 06:43:44 PM---All: We planned to have a meeting either this Thu 25, or Thu Oct 2, 11amPT.
From: Jacques Durand <>
To: "" <>
Date: 09/22/2014 06:43 PM
Subject: [ws-brsp] BRSP meeting either this Thu 25, or Thu Oct 2 ?
Sent by: <>
All:
We planned to have a meeting either this Thu 25, or Thu Oct 2, 11amPT.
Let me know your conflicts if any.
Agenda:
- We have to dispose of the BSP comment we got from the last PR: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-brsp-comment/201409/msg00000.html (Note that this comment raises a point we have been discussing before. If we follow this comment, that also leads to some significant “material” change on the profile .)
- Statements of use, for members who have implemented these profiles under WS-I (IBM, MSFT, Oracle, Asynchrony?). See below template statements (the <> have to be replaced, and the right conformance clause has to be selected.)
- (note: I am trying to localize the WS-I similar statements that were made in the past)
Thanks,
-jacques
------------------ Statement of use templates:
----------------- for BP1.2:
We, <company> have successfully used the Basic Profile v1.2
specified by the WS-BRSP TC in the Committee Specification 01:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-brsp/BasicProfile/v1.2/cs01/BasicProfile-v1.2-cs01.pdf
titled: "Basic Profile v1.2" dated and approved on June 16, 2014.
Our service implementation (INSTANCE conformance target) complied with the
<"Core" Conformance Clause (2.4.1)>
< "HTTP transport" Conformance Clause (2.4.2)>
and underwent interoperability testing with partners, using test assertions in Appendix D.
----------------- for BP2.0:
We, <company> have successfully used the Basic Profile v2.0
specified by the WS-BRSP TC in the Committee Specification 01:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-brsp/BasicProfile/v2.0/cs01/BasicProfile-v2.0-cs01.pdf
titled: "Basic Profile v2.0" dated and approved on June 16, 2014.
Our service implementation (INSTANCE conformance target) complied with the
<"Core" Conformance Clause (2.4.1)>
< "HTTP transport" Conformance Clause (2.4.2)>
and underwent interoperability testing with partners, using test assertions in Appendix D.
----------------- for RSP1.0:
We, <company> have successfully used the Reliable Secure Profile Version 1.0
specified by the WS-BRSP TC in the Committee Specification 01:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-brsp/ReliableSecureProfile/v1.0/cs01/ReliableSecureProfile-v1.0-cs01.pdf
titled: "Reliable Secure Profile Version 1.0" dated and approved on June 16, 2014.
Our service implementation (INSTANCE conformance target) complied with the
<"Core" Conformance Clause based on BP1.2 (2.4.1)>
<"HTTP transport" Conformance Clause based on BP1.2 (2.4.2)>
<"Core" Conformance Clause based on BP2.0 (2.4.3)>
<"HTTP transport" Conformance Clause based on BP2.0 (2.4.4)>
and underwent interoperability testing with partners, using test assertions in Appendix D.
