RE: Question on AI 158

I think both of you have good points
- the old namespace shouldn't remain in the spec.  It should be replaced
with our current namespace. 

Mike, 

You applied 158 - can you confirm you
did it consistently with the most recent decisions on namespace?

Thanks to all of you for your efforts
to improve the quality of the spec.  

Regards, Diane

IBM  Emerging Internet Software Standards



(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123, Fax 845-491-5709

"Mark Ford" <>

08/16/2006 05:07 PM

To

"'Thomas Schulze'" <>

cc

Diane Jordan/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS

Subject

RE: Question on AI 158

My concern is that the two occurrences of the older
WS-BPEL namespace in the

current spec might get missed unless covered by an action item of their
own.

This is why I entered 158. If Issue 289 has changed the namespace then
by

all means use the new namespace, but I think 158 should remain.

-----Original Message-----

From: Thomas Schulze [mailto:] 

Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 4:08 PM

To: Mark Ford

Cc: Diane Jordan

Subject: Question on AI 158

Hi Mark,

I've just seen your AI 158: "Fix namespace for samples in Section
5. From

http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/03/business-process/ to

urn:oasis:names:tc:wsbpel:2.0:process:executable. This occurs in Section

5.1 and Section 5.2"

IMHO the namespace "urn:oasis:names:tc:wsbpel:2.0:process:executable"
is

replaced with "http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/process/executable"

since today's call. That was the intention of Issue 289 / AI 152. Right?

So, if you agree, can this AI be deleted?

Best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

       Thomas Schulze