[Council] VOTE: JEP-0072 (SOAP Over XMPP)

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Furthermore, I'm reviewing the SOAP specifications in more detail and it
appears that we need to define how JEP-0072 meets the requirements for
SOAP protocol bindings in Section 4 of SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1:

http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part1-20030624/#transpbindframew

An example (for HTTP) is here:

http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part2/#soapinhttp

At a minimum, this is something we need to complete before we are ready
for an informal W3c review. So I will work to add this (in consultation 
with JEP author Fabio Forno) soon.

Given the scope of changes required, I'm changing my vote to -1 and I
think we should discuss remanding this JEP back to Experimental while 
we add the necessary information to JEP-0072 and seek an informal W3C
review before it proceeds to Draft (as we did with JEP-0071). I'll add
that to the agenda for this week's meeting.

Peter

Section 4
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 02:49:33PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> I have contacted the activity lead for the W3C Web Services Activity
> about this matter.
> 
> Peter
> 
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 02:26:22PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > Well, as we did with JEP-0071 (XHTML), I could seek out a reviewer from
> > among the editors of the SOAP 1.2 spec. It seems appropriate to follow
> > the same process with this JEP as we did with XHTML, since both specs
> > re-use W3C Recommendations. That will introduce a delay, but it's better
> > to get it right the first time.
> > 
> > Peter
> > 
> > On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 05:37:22PM -0600, Thomas Muldowney wrote:
> > > This is a hard one for me to vote on since I know next to nothing about 
> > > SOAP.  Is there anyone that knows SOAP really well that could look this 
> > > over and post to council?  I feel kind of blind on this one.
> > > 
> > > --temas
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Nov 10, 2004, at 11:20 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > > 
> > > >I've reviewed this again, as a result of which I fixed a few small 
> > > >errors in the text and updated a reference or two. I'm now +1.
> > > >
> > > >/psa
> > > >