Working Group home page · Meeting records · IRC log
This is the complete version, possibly with confidential material, of the minutes.
Insert agenda here
? 2002-11-12: Paco will write two options for naming faults:schema vs WSDL. - RETIRED
ACTION: Sanjiva to explain why naming faults is unnecessary
? 2002-11-12: Roberto will try and come up with another proposal for eliminating message, the discussion goes to email or the next f2f. - RETIRED
Roberto: wants discussion at higher level then just syntax comparison instead of new proposal; will write email listing trade-offs of various alternatives in the design space.
dmoberg: Dale likes Roberto's approach
Sanjiva: supports Roberto's proposal
ACTION: Roberto to provide discussion outline for f2f
? 2002-11-21: Don Mullen to detail changes/addition necessary to unify SOAP and WSDL MEPs. - DONE
? 2002-11-21: Jonathan to refer R120 text to TAG, referencing TAG issue fragmentinXML-28, when that text appears in the draft. - PENDING
? 2002-12-05: Glen to write up a description of the issues surrounding property description in WSDL. (This action replaces Glen's previous action item.) - RETIRED
PENDING 2002-12-19: Jonathan to find material proposing restricting services to a single portType. - PENDING
FAILED 2002-12-19: JM to find volunteers for writing MEP's for input/output and output/input - RETIRED
Jonathan: still looking for material on MEPs; replace with the following two action items
ACTION: Don to write up input-output MEP
ACTION: Amy to write up output-input MEP
? 2002-12-19: Jacek to write up text on SOAP response MEP after Don send his proposal for requrest/response MEP - PENDING
DONE [.2] 2003-01-09: Glen to email Jonathan to schedule F2F time to discuss property description issues. - DONE
? 2003-01-09: Editors to have a draft ready a week from tomorrow. - PENDING - to be discussed under "Publication" agenda item
? 2003-01-09: Gudge and sanjiva to prepare in time for the f2f a draft of the abstract model for interactions. - PENDING
DONE [.3] 2003-01-09: Sanjiva to write an email to describe the two proposals for the syntax and their mapping to the abstract model.
Jonathan welcomed Steven White of SeeBeyond and Umit Yalcinalp of Oracle replacing Joyce Yang.
Jonathan: Is this one correctly marked as DONE? "ACTION: 2002-11-12: Paco will write two options for naming faults: schema vs WSDL." No, it's still pending.
Was "ACTION: Gudge and Sanjiva to prepare in time for the f2f a draft of the abstract model for interactions" replaced by "ACTION: Sanjiva to write an email to describe the two proposals for the syntax and their mapping to the abstract model" ? No, action item on abstract model is separate from action item on concrete syntax.
Dietmar sent belated regrets.
Scribe: Minutes approved as modified.
Jonathan: to update the draft agenda; any suggestions welcome; 2nd draft to come out tomorrow.
Sanjiva: wants to add overloading discussion
Jonathan: is Tuesdays discussion item OK?
Sanjiva: yes it's fine
Jonathan: remember to register for March plenary
Jonathan: Telcon next week is cancelled
Gudge: Work is progressing. Sanjiva to incorporate Amy's type proposal. Amy's approach is different from Sanjiva's. Should have the draft tomorrow.
Jean-Jacques: Working on part 2. There are no longer any issues to add to part 2. Should be able to re-issue part 2.
Philippe: will wait patiently for the green light before sending the draft to publication.
Jonathan: Jacek's email may not exactly be a new issue
Jacek: agreed, not new issue
Arthur: may get naming conflicts. not necessarily the case for parts of a message. Don't have any new viewpoint on it.
Jonathan: right now it's an issue we've already decided on. Is there any new info to revisit?
Jonathan: We have Sanjiva's proposal; there has been some email discussion on it.
Amy: Major concern is kludge of event notification. Also need event patterns based on native protocol support.
Jonathan: will continue at f2f
Scribe: Gudge is looking forward to a "good" discussion
Gudge: Absolutely. But I'm pretty sure I agree with Amy!
Jonathan: We will continue the discussion from the last f2f at this (Jan 2003) f2f.
Amy: Could review and summarize. Question is where to put this in. There was general consensus to include but need specific syntax. Maybe we need several proposals to discuss.
ACTION: Amy will try to get something out by tomorrow (Friday) on what the collection of issues are.
Amy: a lot of other issues are dependent on the outcome of this topic.
Jonathan: This is on the f2f agenda. Will also add (12) [BindingType proposal from Kevin] to the agenda.
Jeff S: When SOAP work completed, we should see how this fell out naturally. There were 3 or 4 messages on last call for requirements. We also got some discussion on attachments. There was also a long post on accessibility. A 3rd post from David Orchard; maybe good to discuss when architecture is available.
Jonathan: We'll use the warm-up period on Monday AM on the requirements topic
Please report here a list of old and new action items. don't forget to include the issued date (i.e. the date when the action was created)
Scribe: Steve Lind