-----Original Message----- From: Tom Maguire [mailto:tmaguire@us.ibm.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 4:52 PM To: Marty Humphrey Cc: 'Ogsa-Wg'; owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org Subject: RE: [ogsa-wg] OGSA-MWS-BOF at GGF14 on Tues June 28, noon-1:30
owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org wrote on 06/22/2005 04:13:17 PM:
Three alternate answers:
[1] MS has been giving *public* talks (I attended one two weeks ago) in which they publicly stated that they believed that "everything" would be in standards bodies within a year. I asked the speaker specifically with regard to WS-SecureConversation, WS-Trust, and WS-Management and the speaker said yes. I believe I followed up privately regarding WS-Transfer, WS-Enumeration, and WS-Eventing, and he said yes. He said that certain things are out of their control, of course, but that every intention is to have them these specs in standards bodies by the end of the year. Yes, I understand that this is an easy statement to attack, but I tend to believe him (MS realizes that every day these are NOT in a standards body is an opportunity lost, right?) Yes, I understand that the world is not so simple, but I tend to believe them.
If you wish to believe this that is your perogative. I on the other hand will wait and not hold my breath. As to opportunity lost; what is the incentive to standardize if developers are happy to work with specs that are not standardized?
I find this statement curious. Isn't this *PRECISELY* what we're talking about? That is, YOU (and I assume that you are not alone in this concern) are reluctant to pursue these specs in part because they're not standardized. So saying that "developers are happy to work with specs that are not standardized" doesn't seem quite right.
[2] Given that Don Ferguson and Francisco Curbera of IBM are co-authors of WS-Eventing, and given that you're employed by IBM, I would turn this around and ask you to see if you can ask internally to find out some publicly-disclosable answers, which you could then share with the rest of the community.
As I mentioned in earlier thread typically co-authors are contractually obliged to one another with regard to joint work (read specs). Those agreements usually spell out ALL of the details of the joint work up to and including how agreement would be reached among the co-authors to bring to an SDO. Typically those joint agreements would preclude unilateral action on any one parties part with respect to the joint works. Additionally, some of those agreements preclude disclosure of the agreement details. With that in mind, IBM as a co-author of WS-Eventing intends to bring the WS-Eventing specification forward with the co-authors at some point. However, there is no definitive date and as a forward looking statement this statement of intent is subject to changes in business imperatives.
While I understand that this can occur, I have no direct experience with this regard. I appreciate your comments here to clear things up. I (perhaps naively) am hoping for the best. -- marty Marty Humphrey Assistant Professor Department of Computer Science University of Virginia