ws-soap-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vahe Amirbekyan <av...@techone.com>
Subject Re: Potential F2F design session for 3.0?
Date Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:44:53 GMT
Hello,

Here are the people declaring their intention to participate the F2F
meeting (based on RSVP voting) on Wednesday afternoon and Thursday
morning (December 6-7th):

1.	Diane L. Davison Diane.Davison@oracle.com
2.	Doug Davis dug@us.ibm.com
3.	Glen Daniels gdaniels@allaire.com
4.	James Snell jmsnell@intesolv.com
5.	Jean-Noel Gadreau jngadreau@activcard.com
6.	Kevin Mitchell kevin.mitchell@xmls.com
7.	Matthew Duftler duftler@us.ibm.com
8.	Ryo Neyama neyama@trl.ibm.co.jp
9.	Sanjiva Weerawarana sanjiva@watson.ibm.com
10.	Stephen Graham sggraham@us.ibm.com
11.	Vahe Amirbekyan avahe@techone.com
12.	Vivek Chopra vivekchopra@yahoo.com
13.	Yuhichi Nakamura NAKAMURY@jp.ibm.com

Sorry, if I have omitted someone. 

Vahe

Glen Daniels wrote:
> 
> > > With a group the size we are expecting (based on the number of +1
> responses
> > > to the original F2F note), it might be difficult to accomplish all the
> > > tasks you suggest.
> >
> > I'm also concerned about the size of the group. It seems to me an
> > unplanned discussion with a group of > 10 will be tough .. Glen, you
> > probably should do an "agenda" type thing and organize this a bit! :-)
> 
> It's a bit tough to do this before knowing exactly how much time + space
> we're going to have.  I should hopefully hear back from the convention
> organizers soon about the room situation.
> 
> See below for more comments re: agenda.
> 
> > I think the scope is still replacing the current engine. Does anyone
> > disagree?
> 
> Nope, sounds right to me.  With the caveat that we will, of course, refactor
> all the useful code we can from the current version into the new one.
> 
> > I think we need to somehow work on the design during this F2F. We have
> > several alternate proposals and its hard to unify these via email.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> My gut feeling on this is that many of us will actually have a huge amount
> of overlap in our requirements lists, and that doing that part will be
> pretty quick.  Once we've written down what we consider to be the important
> parts of the system (including some use-cases), we can dive into going over
> the proposals that have been floated and making some decisions as a group
> about structure, responsibilities, and naming of components.  I'm hopeful we
> can get to the point where we have one or two sets of straw-man UML diagrams
> by the end of the meeting, and then be able to continue from that point via
> email.
> 
> I'll try to work up an agenda as soon as I hear from the XML2K people.
> 
> --Glen

-- 
       (\______________________________________________________/)
     __|_|        Vahe AMIRBEKYAN, Senior Consultant          |_|__
    (___o)            tel: (510) 729 6750 ext.375             (o___)
     (__o)             mailto:avahe@techone.com               (o__)
     (__o)              http://www.techone.com                (o__)
      (_o)____________________________________________________(o_)

Mime
View raw message