[ogsa-wg] FW: Issue #1 proposed resolution

[Samuel Meder]

On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 08:02 -0500, Tom Maguire wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Steve, I'll jump in here for Steve.  There are a couple of things to
> consider.  The GT4 distro is using the March submission specifications for
> WSRF and WSN.  These documents are available from http://www.oasis-open.org
> in the documents section (labeled march).  Those submission documents
> reference an older version of WS-addressing (Only place I could find that
> online was at BEA
> http://dev2dev.bea.com/technologies/webservices/ws-addressing.jsp).

By the way, while the documents refer to a really old version of WS-A,
the GT4 implementation actually updated them to the 2004/03 version (due
to .Net moving to that version). 

/Sam

> On a related note the OGSA Basic Profile 1.0 is currently in progress and
> currently references the November 2004 specification from WSRF and the
> August submission of WS-Addressing.  The BP work has a way to go...
> 
> Tom
> 
> Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created
> them.  —Albert Einstein
> T o m   M a g u i r e
> 
> STSM, On Demand Architecture
> Poughkeepsie, NY  12601
> 
> 
>                                                                            
>              Steve Loughran                                                
>              <steve_loughran at h                                             
>              pl.hp.com>                                                 To 
>              Sent by:                                                      
>              owner-ogsa-wg at ggf                                          cc 
>              .org                      "'OGSA-WG'"                         
>                                        <ogsa-wg at gridforum.org>, "Djaoui, A 
>                                        (Abdeslem)" <A.Djaoui at rl.ac.uk>     
>              01/24/2005 06:45                                      Subject 
>              AM                        Re: [ogsa-wg] FW: Issue #1 proposed 
>                                        resolution                          
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Tuecke wrote:
> > As far as I can tell, this decision has basically no effect on WSRF.
> > The argument being made by some in the WS-A working group is that it is
> > equivalent and more true to the Web to carry a resource identifier as
> > part of the EPR address, rather than in a separate ResourceProperties
> > field -- that is, the resource reference should all be in the URI,
> > rather than split between a URI and separate resource properties.
> > Implementation-wise it certainly makes very little difference.  And the
> > WSRF working group had already abstracted the WS-Resource reference and
> > access pattern, so that it is not tightly coupled to WS-A and reference
> > properties anyway, so WSRF specification-wise it makes no difference.
> >
> > -Steve
> 
> 
> Imagine I was behind schedule writing the WSDL for something based on WSRF.
> 
> Which versions of various specifications should I be using now that are
> approximately in sync? Clearly I should not be specific as to how state
> is represented in an endpointer, or other details that are highly
> unstable.  But what versions of the WSA/WSDL/WSRF specs should be I be
> using, and where do they live?
> 
> -steve
> 
-- 
Sam Meder <meder at mcs.anl.gov>
The Globus Alliance - University of Chicago
630-252-1752