W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > April 2002

Web Services Description Working Group 2002-03-28 meeting minutes (was -04-04 minutes)

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 11:45:33 -0700
Message-ID: <330564469BFEC046B84E591EB3D4D59C05C05AEF@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
I mistakenly titled these minutes as 28 March instead of 4 April.  Sorry for the mistake!

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 2:35 PM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Web Services Description Working Group 2002-04-04 meeting minutes

Web Services Description Working Group 2002-04-04 meeting minutes

Full minutes: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/03-28-minutes (members only)

Participants:
- Keith Ballinger, Microsoft Corporation 
- David Booth, W3C 
- Roberto Chinnici, Sun Microsystems 
- Glen Daniels, Macromedia 
- Youenn Fablet, Canon alternate 
- Mario Jeckle, DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology 
- Sandeep Kumar, Cisco 
- Philippe Le Hégaret, W3C 
- Steve Lind, AT&T 
- Kevin Canyang Liu, SAP 
- Pallavi Malu, Intel Corporation 
- Jonathan Marsh, Microsoft Corporation 
- Dale Moberg, Cyclone Commerce 
- Jean-Jacques Moreau, Canon 
- Johan Pauhlsson, L'Échangeur 
- Radhika Roy 
- Jochen Ruetschlin, DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology 
- Arthur Ryman, IBM 
- Waqar Sadiq, Electronic Data Systems 
- Adi Sakala, IONA Technologies 
- Krishna Sankar, Cisco Systems 
- Jeffrey Schlimmer, Microsoft Corporation 
- Igor Sedukhin, Computer Associates 
- William Stumbo, Xerox 
- Sandra Swearingen, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force 
- Don Wright, Lexmark 
- Prasad Yendluri, webMethods, Inc. 

Regrets:
- Michael Champion, Software AG 
- Laurent De Teneuille, L'Échangeur 
- Dietmar Gaertner, Software AG 
- Tom Jordahl, Macromedia 
- Jacek Kopecky, Systinet 
- Dan Kulp, IONA Technologies 
- Mike McHugh, W. W. Grainger 
- Jeff Mischkinsky, Oracle Corporation 
- Dave Solo, Citigroup 
- Jerry Thrasher, Lexmark 
- Sanjiva Weerawarana, IBM Corporation 

Absents:
- Mike Ballantyne, Electronic Data Systems 
- Mike Davoren, W. W. Grainger 
- Tim Finin, University of Maryland 
- Martin Gudgin, Developmentor 
- Michael Mealling, Verisign 
- Don Mullen, Verisign 
- Stefano Pugliani, Sun 
- Daniel Schutzer, Citigroup 
- Aaron Skonnard, Developmentor 
- William Vambenepe, Hewlett-Packard Company 

Observers:
- Ayse Dilber, AT&T 
- Stefano Pugliani, Sun 

Agenda
1. Approval of minutes 
2. Scribe 
3. Primer editor 
4. Publication Schedule 
5. Use Cases 
6. Requirements 

Review of outstanding action items
- In progress 2002.02.14. Jonathan Marsh will map the Face-to-Face meetings 6 months in advance. 
- No requests yet 2002-03-07. Philippe. Set up authors with CVS. 
- REMOVED (likely won't have new text until group discusses... let's scrap the AI 2002.03.07. Jeffrey and Keith will go propose new text for DR042. 
- PENDING 2002.03.07. Keith to discuss open content model design. 
- DONE (see logistics page)2002.03.14: DavidB will request a phone bridges for the duration of the meeting. 
- PENDING 2002.03.14: Sandeep will take a first pass at providing snippets for use cases in 2.1 Messaging. 
- DUPLICATE 2002.03.21. Jeffrey and Keith. Add DR042 to req doc 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. To all. please register for Apr F2F or send regrets 
- how can you check if you are registered? 
- Logistics page link to a list, Jonathan will send a list 
- Jonathan : registration system needs a little tweaking (some confusing UI stuff) 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. Sandeep. Send F2F dinner invitations to arch/desc group 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. Laurent/Jonathan. Investigate June F2F hosting in Paris 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. Jeffrey. Make sure we are converging on 3 categories of requirements 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. Youenn. Ask Jean-Jacque if he is willing to provide an abstract model. 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. Jeffrey. Investigate the possibility of an abstract model (but without promising to make one himself). 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. Editors (Jeff/Sanjiva). Do presentations of AM draft and top 5 broken items in WSDL 1.1 at the F2F (yourself or delegate). 
- Whoever is doing this should make sure this is going to happen. 
- discussion of definition/scope of this AI 
- Jean-Jaques is creating an XML doc from Simon Fell's list of issues 
- Keith volunteers to do the deed 

Agenda Items

Approval of minutes

Participants approved the Mar 21 minutes with no further corrections.

Scribe

Glen Daniels, Macromedia.

Primer editor

Discussion of Alan Kotok's resignation and the primer. David Booth takes over as lead primer editor. Call for more primer volunteers.

Philippe asks when F2F agenda will be available?
Jonathan: next few days (calls for agenda items from the group)

Publication Schedule

Our charter calls for publishing a Requirements doc in March. This date has slipped. I suggest targeting April 19th for publication of our first Requirements and Use Cases drafts. Also, to meet our June WD date, we need to leave the FTF with some instructions to our editors outlining our expectations about a first working draft.

Glen: June seems a little ambitious

Jonathan: yeah, but we should publish in whatever form we've got ready
Consensus to strive for April 19th publication date.


Use Cases

Sandeep outlined an organizational plan last week, and at [8]. We'll approve (or reject) this plan and set some interim dates leading to publication.

Waqar: Wanted to make sure these were really *description* use-cases. If we make sure the use-cases align with one of the three description viewpoints, we'll be sure they fit.

Jonathan : Looking for a proposal the WG can get behind... can we get a version of this that you'd like to see the WG consider by next week? Then we can have a publishable doc which goes out on the 19th.

ACTION: Waqar to prepare proposal for publishable version of Use Case Doc by next weeks telcon.
 
Requirements

Latest draft is at [9]. We'll start by considering the consolidated SOAP 1.2 requirements proposed by Jean-Jacques [10]. 

Biggest change is addition of SOAP 1.2 reqs. Changed metadata assoc. with each requirement to make cleaner. 

Sec 4.7 - we should keep R028?

JJM describes R028

Glen : is 028 crisp enough? Want to make sure we're not implying a "flat" description of every message + every extension, etc.

Jonathan : leave this as a draft and JJM + Glen work towards new req about extensions?

ACTION: Glen and Jean-Jacques to redraft R028

R065 - any objections? Nope.

REMOVE DRAFT STATUS.

R062 - can we really meet this req? Discussion of "bindings", and perhaps supporting the XMLP group's experimental SOAP 1.2 binding to email.

Glen : A little concerned that the abstraction boundaries are being fuzzed - an "InterfaceBinding" should be to SOAP 1.2, not SOAP 1.2 for a particular SOAP transport binding.

(some discussion)

New wording : "WG will ensure that the SOAP 1.2 InterfaceBinding is capable of describing transports other than HTTP."

ACCEPTED

R067 - Extension points in WSDL 1.1 are "fixed"... need more flexibility.

Jonathan : What about "WG will ensure that there are adequate points of extensibility in the InterfaceBinding."

Roberto : this is too open-ended...

Sandeep : what does this mean? If we can't define it, how do we know it's adequate?

Jeff : "Content model is open" is really what we're talking about here. This is an escape clause.

Sandeep : binding is where "rubber meets the road". Needs to be crisp.

Jeff : there's a "required" attribute that could be used here. This type of thing is reflected all over the place. Hope we have an over-arching pattern of extensibility. Don't want to preclude people from adding value to these descriptions.

Arthur : wording seems too open ended...

(various) : can we move this into a general req?

ACTION : Jeff will generalize R067 and move it to the extensibility section

R031 - SOAP 1.2 intermediaries

Jeff: this is only a SHOULD, we still have MUSTs to do... let's move to 29

R029 - Covered adequately by 028? Any objections to rejecting?

REJECT - redundant

R030

REJECT - redundant

R060 discussion of what this means?

ACTION : Philippe to come up with clarification of text + a use-case

Proposal : accept R111 and upgrade to MUST

ACCEPTED

R061

REJECT - redundant with 65 and 111

R063

REJECT - redundant with 62

R064 (discussion) We shouldn't be describing wire formats per se, just referring to them...

REJECT - out of scope

R066 Discussion - is this just about SOAP, or other protocols? If the latter, maybe it should stay...

Note that R069 touches on this as well...

ACTION - Jeff will massage 69 and 66 together and see about coming up with better wording

R077

REJECT - redundant with 28

R078

REJECT - redundant with 65

R079

REJECT - redundant with 28

R080

REJECT - redundant with 28

R081

ACCEPT

Jonathan : we'll continue next week. Consolidation has been working really well, let's keep up with that.

Action Items
- PENDING 2002.02.14. Jonathan Marsh will map the Face-to-Face meetings 6 months in advance. 
- CONTINUED 2002-03-07. Philippe. Set up authors with CVS. 
- PENDING 2002.03.07. Keith to discuss open content model design. 
- PENDING 2002.03.14: Sandeep will take a first pass at providing snippets for use cases in 2.1 Messaging. 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. To all. please register for Apr F2F or send regrets 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. Sandeep. Send F2F dinner invitations to arch/desc group 
- PENDING 2002.03.21. Laurent/Jonathan. In
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 15:10:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:19 GMT