W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > May 2006

Minutes from XML Schema Patterns for Databinding call 9 May 2006

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 16:59:10 +0100
Message-ID: <2A7793353757DB4392DF4DFBBC95225504BFE980@I2KM11-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>

Minutes from today's call are now available here:

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/6/5/09-databinding-minutes.html

and below for Tracker's searching


- DRAFT -
Databinding WG Teleconference
9 May 2006

Agenda

See also: IRC log
Attendees

Present
    Jon Calladine, (BT)
    George Cowe (Origo Services)
    Paul Downey (Chair, BT)
    Otu Ekanem (BT) 
Regrets
    Ajith Ranabahu (WSO2) 
Chair
    pauld
Scribe
    pauld

Contents

    * Topics
         1. ISSUE-34: multiple schemas for a single namespace
         2. Administrivia
         3. ISSUE-36: Tool selection for testing of basic pattern assertions
         4. Contribution of Schemas
         5. ISSUE-10: Mapping Element and Type names
         6. ISSUE-39: importing components from another namespace
         7. ISSUE-40: XML Schema document encoding
         8. ISSUE-41: annotation and documentation elements as basic patterns
         9. ISSUE-42: schema version and ID attributes as a basic patterns
        10. AOB
    * Summary of Action Items

ISSUE-34: multiple schemas for a single namespace

pauld: relates progress in the WS-I WG
... preferred outcome?

george: ideal outcome is to have our practice enshired, but as usual practicalities with tools and what our customers want may lead to a different outcome being acceptable.

Administrivia

last weeks minutes approved

canvas of likely f2f participation for the Agenda

expecting WD publication soon

ISSUE-36: Tool selection for testing of basic pattern assertions

discussion of how we work

pauld: "basic" means "Known to work well with current toolkits" and really aimed at schema authors

pauld: "advanced" means "in widespread use and really no reason to not work well with toolkits"

jonc: and "Design Considerations"?

pauld: unhappy about "Design Considerations" becoming a bucket for "weasel words"

pauld: .. e.g. xs:choice doesn't work in Axis ADB and yet is a basic pattern

george: don't forget that Axis is used in many Websphere implementations

pauld: working on the assumption that doesn't work in .NET at least means *doesn't* fit into basic patterns

pauld: we'll enumerate the tools we're aware of subject to ACTION-19

jonc: happy to use the test report as a means of documenting the toolkits we actually used, rather than those we plan to use.

pauld: others can supply evidence of running our tests to get on the CR report
Contribution of Schemas

george: am building an example schema which contains patterns important to Origo

pauld: contribution of individual patterns most helpful in tracking issues and updating our document

pauld: been looking at other vertical schemas, hence last week's DOS attack on the issues list

ISSUE-10: Mapping Element and Type names

pauld: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsd-databinding/2006May/0000
... am fairly unhappy with this proposal, feel we need some testing in this area may clarify matters for the Basic patterns

jonc: Design Consideration is again a little weak for an obvious problem with tools

george: we use a simple naming convention
... unaware of mapping mechanism in Axis or .NET

<scribe> ACTION: pdowney build test cases for ISSUE-10 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-databinding-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-37 - Build test cases for ISSUE-10 [on Paul Downey - due 2006-05-16].

jonc: test cases are a good way to document "anti-patterns"

ISSUE-39: importing components from another namespace

pauld: these patterns don't prevent other patterns being added if they interoperate, e.g. multiple schema locations. Our experience is these patterns work well and are good enough.

RESOLUTION: ISSUE-39 closed with enclosed proposed patterns

ISSUE-40: XML Schema document encoding

pauld: took Basic Profile text on schema document encoding, makes sense if we're at least as restrictive, if not more so.

george: happy with this, we currently make use of ISO-8859-1, but expect to move to UTF-8 soon

RESOLUTION: close ISSUE-40 with enclosed proposal

ISSUE-41: annotation and documentation elements as basic patterns

george: unaware of issues with databinding and documentation elements

jonc: seen issues with a large WSDL documents and XMLSpy

pauld: would simple test cases help in this area?

<scribe> ACTION: pdowney to produce a documentation pattern test case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-databinding-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-38 - Produce a documentation pattern test case [on Paul Downey - due 2006-05-16].

ISSUE-42: schema version and ID attributes as a basic patterns

pauld: version discussed in WSDL WG

jonc: does it change anything on the wire?

RESOLUTION: close ISSUE-42 with enclosed proposal
AOB

o2: been working on the automated test kits, making progress
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: pdowney build test cases for ISSUE-10 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-databinding-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: pdowney to produce a documentation pattern test case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-databinding-minutes.html#action03]
 
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2006 15:59:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:20:37 GMT