- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 16:26:46 +0200
- To: SAWSDL public list <public-ws-semann@w3.org>
Agenda for SAWSDL telcon 2007/04/03 Dial-in information (member-only) [1] Zakim instructions [2] [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-semann/2007Apr/0000 [2] http://www.w3.org/2002/01/UsingZakim ---------------------------------------- 1. Call setup - Scribe list: (active) LF, RA, BNS, EP, TV, CP, JF, PM, CV, HL, AS, LH, AM, CB (inactive) JBD, JL, MK, JH, NG, TP - Any modifications to agenda? - Any other business? ---------------------------------------- 2. Approval of minutes of our last telcon - Minutes of last call [1] [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20070320 ---------------------------------------- 3. Action Item Review - Action item list [1] [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/admin/#Actions 2006-11-21: Eric to upgrade the SPDL page for SAWSDL readers and then work things out with the Usage Guide - pending? ---------------------------------------- 4. Administrivia - Any tutorials, articles, presentations, tools, projects, applications, demos, portals for our WG page? - WG page updated with all the emailed links - Check if I got your tool/article - WSDL 2.0 delay gives us additional 2-3 weeks to catch up ---------------------------------------- 5. Implementation status - Implementation report [1] - Test suite [2] - Status of your implementations? - Two WSDL 2.0 parsers - Woden (UGA) - WSMO4J? - One WSDL 1.1 parser (with attrExtensions support) - UGA - SAWSDL4J? - IBM? - RDF mapping - DERI - pending - Specs using SAWSDL - OU - DERI - should be available at time of telcon at [3] [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/CR/Overview.html [2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/CR/testsuite.html [3] http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d24/d24.2/v0.1/#grounding_sawsdl ---------------------------------------- 6. Future of the Working Group - Summary of our last discussion at [1] - After we get to Proposed Rec, we can suggest to do further work - We'd need to formulate new charter, to be approved by the AC - Or we can suggest new WG(s), declare success and dissolve - In all cases, we need to be fairly concrete in our suggestions - Relation to Service Modeling Language? [2] [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-semann/2007Mar/0004 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-semann/2007Mar/0023
Received on Monday, 2 April 2007 14:27:07 UTC