RE: [wsbpel] Fw: issue categories (really, on issues categories :-)

Looking at Dieter's categorisation, it seemed better than the "areas"
that I had in the issue list, so I've updated the "working copy" at
http://www.choreology.com/external/WS_BPEL_issues_list.html with most of
the cases where he had something different.  I've only bothered to
change things for open issues.  I have removed the rather meaningless
catch-all "Technology concepts" - these are now mostly "Related
standards", "Syntax and validation" or "Specification editing", and I've
avoided introducing "New concepts".

BTW, I can easily generate a tab-separated-value summary of the list,
with selected fields, if anyone wants such. Would it be convenient to
people to have this made available occasinally/generally. (I fear Dieter
may have had to some reverse-engineering to get his tables)

Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dieter Koenig1 [mailto:] 
> Sent: 16 March 2004 16:35
> To: 
> Subject: [wsbpel] Fw: issue categories
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Folks, in order to support creating an agenda for the f2f 
> w.r.t. issue resolutions, I looked at the issues, the issue 
> categories, and areas that seem to need resolution with 
> higher priority.
> 
> The attached xls contains issue categories (based on work 
> that Ivana and Monica have done); you may use Data->Sort to 
> view it any way you like.
> 
> In addition, let me propose that, instead of starting with 
> issue 1 and just iterating through the list, we may address 
> the following areas with higher
> priority:
>       Issue 10 (Serialization of compensation) and the
>       "permeable/reversible/serializable" discussion (also 
> includes issue
>       1)
>       Issue 11 (Query in <to> close should allow assigning to new
>       locations) and other Data Handling issues (48, 63, 90, 103)
>       Issue 4 (Dynamic parallel processing)
> 
> Please let me know in case of any additional suggestions.
> 
> (See attached file: BPEL Issues.xls)
> 
> Kind Regards
> DK
>