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

RE: minutes from April 18

From: Sedukhin, Igor <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 17:25:30 -0400
Message-ID: <849C1D32E4C7924F854D8A0356C72A9E036FC40C@usilms08.ca.com>
To: Tom Jordahl <tomj@macromedia.com>, "'www-ws-desc@w3.org'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Tom, no problem at all. I just wanted to get those points in for the sake of
a record.
I'm sure I would miss a lot more when I'm taking notes :)...
IRC is great when it is possible to connect... wireless :)...

-- Igor Sedukhin .. (Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Jordahl [mailto:tomj@macromedia.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 1:40 PM
To: Sedukhin, Igor; Tom Jordahl; 'www-ws-desc@w3.org'
Subject: RE: minutes from April 18



Igor,

I apologize if my note taking during this technical discussion omitted your
points.  I will be the first to admit that my ability to concisely summarize
individual points of the discussion "on paper" is limited at best.  

A good tool for getting stuff in to the minutes is the IRC chat.  If those
making technical points could summarize what they said/are going to say on
the chat, then the note taker can do a quick cut and paste and not lose the
thread of the discussion.

Anyone else have ideas for getting the main points of technical discussion
in to the minutes for the note takers?  Thankfully, I wont be taking notes
again for long while. :-)

--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Web Services


-----Original Message-----
From: Sedukhin, Igor [mailto:Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com]
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 7:57 PM
To: Tom Jordahl; 'www-ws-desc@w3.org'
Subject: RE: Web Services Description Conference call minutes for April 18 ,
20 02


Tom,

Just for the record. 

When discussing
Issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? 

I was pretty vocal about not trying to offload the requirement to define
events and notifications to Orchestration standards. Also it should not
matter if it is defined and/or required by other standards. Events and
notifications (as well as subscription mechanism) must be part of the WSDL
to properly describe service operations. I think Sanjiva had this point
before (during F2F), but during the call, discussion seemed to only focused
on the removal part, not the alternative event/callback definition which was
part of the original proposal.

-- Igor Sedukhin .. (Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Jordahl [mailto:tomj@macromedia.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 12:57 PM
To: 'www-ws-desc@w3.org'
Subject: Web Services Description Conference call minutes for April 18, 20
02



Here are the minutes from today's conference call:

Web Services Description Working Group Conference Call
April 18, 2002

Agenda
-----------
1.  Attendance
2.  Approval of minutes
3.  New minutes process review
4.  Review of Action items.
5.  Coordination with WS Arch WG
6.  Requirements doc.
7.  WG approval to publish requirements and usage scenarios documents. 8.
Tracking new issues 9.  Issues discussion.


Attendance
-----------------
Present:
 *Mike Ballantyne       Electronic Data Systems
 David Booth            W3C
 Allen Brookes          Rogue Wave Software
 Roberto Chinnici       Sun Microsystems
 Glen Daniels           Macromedia
 Youenn Fablet          Canon
 Dietmar Gaertner       Software AG
 Mario Jeckle           DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology
 Tom Jordahl            Macromedia
 Jacek Kopecky          Systinet
 *Sandeep Kumar          Cisco Systems
 Philippe Le Hégaret    W3C
 Steve Lind             AT&T
 *Kevin Canyang Liu      SAP
 Pallavi Malu           Intel
 Jonathan Marsh         Microsoft Corporation
 *Mike McHugh            W. W. Grainger
 *Don Mullen             Tibco
 Waqar Sadiq            Electronic Data Systems
 Adi Sakala             IONA Technologies
 Jeffrey Schlimmer      Microsoft Corporation
 Igor Sedukhin          Computer Associates
 Sandra Swearingen      U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force
 *William Stumbo         Xerox
 Jerry Thrasher         Lexmark
 Sanjiva Weerawarana    IBM Corporation
 Joyce Yang             Oracle
 Prasad Yendluri        webMethods, Inc.
* lost due to technical difficulties.

Regrets:
 Michael Champion       Software AG
 Laurent De Teneuille   L'Echangeur
 Tim Finin              University of Maryland
 Dan Kulp               IONA
 Jeff Mischkinsky       Oracle Corporation
 Jean-Jacques Moreau    Canon
 Jochen Ruetschlin      DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology
 Arthur Ryman           IBM
 Krishna Sankar         Cisco Systems
 Dave Solo              Citigroup
 William Vambenepe      Hewlett-Packard Company
 Don Wright             Lexmark

Absent:
 Keith Ballinger        Microsoft Corporation
 Mike Davoren           W. W. Grainger
 Michael Mealling       Verisign
 Dale Moberg            Cyclone Commerce
 Johan Pauhlsson        L'Echangeur
 Stefano Pugliani       Sun
 Radhika Roy            AT&T
 Daniel Schutzer        Citigroup



Approval of minutes
-----------------------------
Last conference call:  http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/04/04-minutes.html
Face-2Face:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Apr/0050.html
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Apr/0052.html
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Apr/0060.html

April 4th - Approved
F2F minutes - Approved


Problems with Verizon switch is preventing many from calling in

 
New minutes process
--------------------------------
Details at:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Apr/0062.html
Highlights:
 - Publish agenda's to public list
 - Publish minutes to public list, omitting 'sensitive' info.
 - Dialing details will go to admin list.
 - Corrections are sent to the public list.

TomJ: How does the attendance list get to the scribe? 
Jonathan will send in Email to the scribe.



Call adjourned to another conference call bridge.



Action Items
-------------------
DONE 2002.02.14 Jonathan: Map Face-to-Face meetings 6 months in advance.
 - Dates and places on web page
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/04/f2fJuneLogistics.html

IN PROGRESS 2002.04.04 Editors to get CVS requests to Philippe. 
KEITH ABSENT 2002.03.07 Keith. Discuss open content model design. 
DONE 2002.03.21 Editors (Jeff/Sanjiva). Do presentations of top 5 broken
           items in WSDL 1.1 at the F2F. 
DONE 2002.04.04 Everyone to read the use cases and send e-mail raising  
           issue for the FTF. 
DONE? 2002.04.04 Jeffrey to rephrase R083
IN PROGRESS 2002.04.10 Sanjiva - add inconsistent use of port and endpoint
to issues
           list Arthur - work on text for a requirement to define 
           equivalence of wsdl document
DONE (by Jonathan) 2002.04.10 Jeffrey Schlimmer to remove expected version
annotations. 
PENDING 2002.04.11 Keith B. will write up descriptions for issues discussed
in
           presentations and add to issue lists if not there yet. due 
           date: next conference call.  
DONE 2002.04.11 Sanjiva W.  will post descriptions for issues discussed in
           presentations and add to issue lists if not there yet.  due date:
           next conference call 
PENDING 2002.04.11 Jeff Schlimmer Add UPNP example to use cases. 
DONE 2002.04.12 David Booth ask Eric for clarification and will cc RDF
interest
           group. 
DONE 2002.04.12 Jeffery, Sandeep, Waqar - have drafts ready by next telcon
on
           Thursday 4/18. 

NEW ACTION - 2002.04.18  - Waqar will identify use cases to remove. 
NEW ACTION - 2002.04.18  - Waqar will post by next Tuesday a draft.  
                           Publish if no objections at the next telecon.

DONE 2002.04.12 JM will pursue use case task force with coordination group.

Coordination with WS Arch WG
----------------------------
Jonathan:
- Arch group has proposed they own the Glossary and Usage Scenarios docs.
- Description will not create their own, just comment on theirs.

Waqar: concern that we might not like the docs we have to use.
Jonathan: doesn't see any reason why our feedback would be ignored
Glen: our usage may be more detailed than theirs
Jonathan: Use cases would be more detailed than usage scenarios and slightly
different
TomJ: Let 'em have it, and lets get on to WSDL


Requirements doc
--------------------------
Latest doc:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Apr/att-0104/01-ws-desc-
reqs-20020417.html
Jonathan moved rejects to the bottom.  Still editorial work to be done

NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Jeffery will clean up R001
Proposed new wording for R001 from Dave Booth:
 [Accepted, Must, Charter] The language developed by the WG must permit any
programming model,  transport or protocol for communication between peers.
(Last revised 21 Feb 2002.)

New requirement from Mark Baker:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Apr/0075.html
Jonathan wants to add as a draft requirement. No objections

WG approval to publish requirements and usage scenarios documents
-----------------------------------------------------------------

NEW ACTION: 2002.04.18 Jeffery will clean up requirements document, 
and we will have a publishable draft by next Tuesday, 
Publication process will start after conference call Thursday.

Discussion about how the review process will work.

NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Jonathan, Philippe Investigate setting up new mailing
list for review comments.

Tracking new issues
-----------------------
NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Sanjiva Add 5 new issues raised by Prasad in Email to
the issues list. NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Waqar Add new use case raised on the
mailing list to use cases.


Issues discussion
------------------
Issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? 
Thread starts at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Apr/0059.html

Prasad: Wants to keep them.
JacekK: Address on port don't make sense for these operations Various
arguments that something *like* solicit-response should be kept in the spec
JeffS: It's not obvious to me that we need to keep solicit-response in the
spec.

NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Prasad Write up question for XLANG and/or WSFL groups
whether 
they need solicit-response.

NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Jonathan Solicit input from XLANG and/or WSFL groups
whether 
they need solicit-response.



Issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? Thread
starts at  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Apr/0061.html

Tabled till next time due to time limitations.



Summary of New Action Items
---------------------------
NEW ACTION 2002.04.18  Waqar will identify use cases to remove. 
NEW ACTION 2002.04.18  Waqar will post by next Tuesday a draft.  
                       Publish if no objections at the next telecon. NEW
ACTION 2002.04.18 Jeffery will clean up R001 NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Jonathan,
Philippe Investigate setting up new mailing list for review comments. NEW
ACTION 2002.04.18 Sanjiva Add 5 new issues raised by Prasad in to the issues
list. NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Waqar Add new use case raised on the mailing
list NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Prasad Write up question for XLANG and/or WSFL
groups whether 
they need solicit-response.
NEW ACTION 2002.04.18 Jonathan Solicit input from XLANG and/or WSFL groups
whether 
they need solicit-response.
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 17:26:13 GMT

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