- 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