W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-meps@w3.org > May 2003

RE: Raw IRC log from 21 May 2003 MEP TF telcon

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:51:45 -0700
Message-ID: <1113DDB24D4A2841951BFDF86665EE19064760E3@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, <public-ws-desc-meps@w3.org>

Summary:

Present: David Booth, Amy Lewis, Jonathan Marsh, Umit Yalcinalp

Examined documented assumptions as
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl12/meps-vs-iops/mep
s-vs-iops_clean.htm.  Much discussion about the value of crisply worded,
minimal assumptions, and particulars of the assumptions recorded.

Reworded assumptions 1 and 2 to read:

1) A WSD is intended for use by a WS and its client or clients.
2) A primary purpose of the WSD is to establish a contract on the
syntax, datatypes, and protocols which the interacting parties will use
to interact.

No definitive rework of the remaining issues.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 10:21 AM
> To: public-ws-desc-meps@w3.org
> Subject: Raw IRC log from 21 May 2003 MEP TF telcon
> 
> 
> 
> Session Start: Wed May 21 09:06:54 2003
> Session Ident: #ws-desc
> *** Now talking in #ws-desc
> *** dbooth has joined #ws-desc
> *** alewis sets mode: +o Marsh
> *** alewis sets mode: -o alewis
> * alewis likes that better ...
> *** umit has joined #ws-desc
> <dbooth>
>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl12/meps-vs-iops/mep
> s-vs-iops_clean.htm
> *** Marsh is now known as Scribe
> <Scribe> David: Previously uncovered differences in assumptions.
> <Scribe> ... For example, how messages are viewed.
> <Scribe> ... Go through assumptions, see if we all agree.
> <Scribe> 1) is agreeable to all
> <Scribe> 2) ?
> <Scribe> 4) WSD has a single "meaning"
> <Scribe> Jonathan: what's the meaning of "meaning" - different users
> will view it through different lenses.
> <Scribe> Umit: Tells client how to connect to a service.  Contract for
> the client as presented by the service.
> <Scribe> Umit: How it came into existence has nothing to do with it.
> <Scribe> David: Anyone who reads the contract should infer the same
> meaning.
> <Scribe> 6)
> <Scribe> Jonathan: "complete"?
> <Scribe> David: includes endpoint uris, bindings, interfaces.
> <Scribe> Amy: "interface" is a generic term here - that might confuse
> someone.
> <Scribe> Umit: "A complete WSD" -> "A full WSDL document including
> imports"
> <Scribe> "A full definition of the service, which can be defined by
> multiple WSDL documents and Schemas".
> <Scribe> Umit: Transitive closure of documents that define a service.
> <Scribe> Amy: WSDL can contain multiple services.
> <Scribe> Amy: Don't have a concept of a "service" (other than the one
> being developed by the WG)
> <Scribe> Amy: Need a term for the chain of WSDL constructs defining a
> particular service?
> <Scribe> David: My definition is a service that contains endpoints.
> <Scribe> Jonathan: Should we look at it starting with the particular
Web
> service and all the description components associated with it?
> <Scribe> David: Trying to look at it from the point of view of the
> description.
> <Scribe> Amy: Multiple clients may make use of the same contract.
> *** dbooth has quit IRC (Ping timeout )
> <Scribe>  Amy: Don't need "complete WSD" concept to get this across.
> *** dbooth has joined #ws-desc
> <Scribe> Umit: Need an endpoint to interact.
> <Scribe> Amy: You can do interesting things with parts of WSDL (e.g.
> abstract) without actually interacting.
> <Scribe> David: Suppose you have a WSDL that includes interfaces,
> bindings, endpoints - what is it useful for?
> <Scribe> Amy: Depends who's looking at it.
> <Scribe> ... Registry use is different than client.
> <Scribe> ... Item 2 and item 4 amount to the same thing?
> <Scribe> Umit: 1) seems to cover multiple clients.
> <Scribe> Jonathan: ... "it's client or clients"
> <Scribe> Jonathan: 2) "primary" purpose (not all purposes are
mechanics
> of interaction)
> <Scribe> Amy: Need to distill these assumptions down.
> <Scribe> Amy: 1) = from point of view of service, WSD is intended for
> use by service _and_ it's client(s).
> <Scribe> ... 2) WSD represents a contract.
> <Scribe> ... 4) Is a complete (only?) contract.
> <Scribe> David: no
> <Scribe> Umit: Two different people can infer the same meaning from
the
> contract.
> <Scribe> Amy: Exclusionary statements will never be complete (phase of
> moon, etc.)
> <Scribe> David: Called these out because they were questioned
> <Scribe> Jonathan: Seems to be a vague assumption that a WSD should be
> adequate to capture the mechanics of interacting with the service.
> <Scribe> David: No, I'm saying that given a WSDL document, what is the
> intended purpose.
> <Scribe> Jonathan: Description can be used for many purposes.
> <Scribe> 1) A WSD is intended for use by a WS and its client or
clients.
> <Scribe> 2) A primary purpose of the WSD is to ensure that the
> interacting parties agree on the syntax, datatypes and protocols they
> will use to interact.
> <Scribe> Amy: (drop 2a)
> <Scribe> 2) A primary purpose of the WSD is to establish a contract on
> the syntax, datatypes, and protocols which the interacting parties
will
> use to interact.
> * alewis gives Scribe a trout
> * Scribe is not sure that is a good thing
> <Scribe> David: OK, but is it exclusive of those things?
> * alewis suggests that it's a good thing if it's fresh (or even
alive),
> and that maybe the goodness is inversely correlated with freshness
....
> <Scribe> Jonathan: not exclusive.
> <Scribe> Umit: This should be a sufficient condition.
> *** umit has quit IRC (Quit: umit )
> *** alewis has left #ws-desc (Bye! )
> *** Disconnected
> Session Close: Wed May 21 10:19:23 2003
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2003 18:51:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Friday, 25 March 2005 11:17:39 GMT