On Aug 12, 2004, at 6:22 PM, Rich Salz wrote:

> I'm just curious why W3C and not OASIS?
> If WS-Addressing is so fundamental to the rest of the WS-xxx stack,
> it makes more sense to go to the place that works faster.

Back when I was involved with web services at W3C, there was an 
awareness (uhh,  beaten into them by various big companies on multiple 
occasions) that they needed to improve the turnaround, and some sort of 
fast track process for specs that had been pretty well discussed before 
submission might be in order.  Perhaps this is meant as a beta test of 
that idea?  This is pure speculation on my part.

The other side of the coin is that OASIS hasn't been the speedy rubber 
stamping process that some anticipated, others feared, a couple of 
years ago.  WS-Reliability et al are a case in point.  BPEL hasn't 
exactly raced through the process either.  My impression on this is 
even more speculative, since I've never been involved in an OASIS TC.

So, my best guess, un-encumbered by actual knowledge, is that W3C has 
informally invited this submission with some sort of understanding that 
WS-Addressing won't be condemned to the ring of W3-Purgatory that 
XQuery has been dwelling in for the last 5 years or so.  Maybe sortof 
like what they did to tempt Atom into the W3C fold, but handled more 
quietly?