Gilbert Pilz wrote:
> A couple of answers:
>
> 1. I'm fine with using "wsrx" as the value of the "tc" component.
>
> 2. My reading of some of the examples in the guidelines and in other TCs
> lead me to believe that we had to use "01" etc. but you are correct in
> that this removes the chance of using minor versions (a bad thing). I'm
> fine with using "1.0" as the productVersion.
>
I would like to suggest that we not use "1.0" but a value > 1.0 (1.1,
2.0, whatever). This would avoid any confusion with the submission which
has the same specification name.
Comments?
-Anish
--
> I'll ammend my proposals to make these changes. I'm looking for
> suggestions on the "artifactName" component. The guidelines are
> confusing (at least to me) on this one.
>
> - g
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Niblett [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 4:15 AM
> To: Gilbert Pilz
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Required Artifact Metadata
>
> I have a couple of questions:
>
> 1. The guidelines at
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13344/ArtifactIdentifi
> cationRequirements-v1.0-wd-15.pdf
> say that the tc: component should be the short name of the TC with
> hyphens removed, i.e. wsrx. You have put "tbd", does this mean that you
> are looking at an alternative?
>
> 2. The guidelines permit the use of 1.0 as the productVersion, and that
> appears to be the form used in the current WDs (and other OASIS specs).
> Are you proposing not to use a minor version?
>
>
> Peter Niblett
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Gilbert Pilz"
>
> <Gilbert.Pilz@bea
>
> .com>
> To
> <>
>
> 14/07/2005 05:19
> cc
>
>
>
> Subject
> [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Required
>
> Artifact Metadata
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Title: Required Artifact Metadata
>
>
> Description: OASIS guidelines (
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13344/ArtifactIdentifi
> cationRequirements-v1.0-wd-15.pdf
> ) require that the artifacts (documents, schemas, etc.) produced by a TC
> should have a minimum set of of metadata that describes these artifacts.
>
>
> Justification: OASIS requirement.
>
>
> Target: core, policy
>
>
> Type: editorial
>
>
> Proposal: We propose the following values for each specification:
>
>
> WS-ReliableMessaging:
>
>
> artifactName: TBD
>
>
> tc: TBD
>
>
> product: wsreliablemessaging
>
>
> productVersion: 01
>
>
> artifactType: spec
>
>
> stage: wd
>
>
> descriptiveName: Web Services Reliable Messaging Protocol
> Specification
>
>
> WS-RM Policy:
>
>
> artifactName: TBD
>
>
> tc: TBD
>
>
> product: wsrmpolicy
>
>
> productVersion: 01
>
>
> artifactType: spec
>
>
> stage: wd
>
>
> descriptiveName: Web Services Reliable Messaging Policy Assertion
> Specification
>
>
> Note that the "product names" of these two artifacts differ.
>
>
>
