W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > December 2004

RE: MEP/Fault task force telcon Thursday?

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:00:59 -0800
Message-ID: <7DA77BF2392448449D094BCEF67569A50607B4E7@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "David Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Rats, looks like your timestamp beat mine by 3 min!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Booth [mailto:dbooth@w3.org]
> Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 8:55 AM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Cc: Jonathan Marsh
> Subject: RE: MEP/Fault task force telcon Thursday?
> 
> Here are minutes from today's MEP task force call:
> http://www.w3.org/2004/12/23-ws-desc-minutes.htm
> 
> And also included below in plain text.
> 
> =================================================================
> 
>    [1]W3C
> 
>       [1] http://www.w3.org/
> 
>                       WSDL 2.0 MEP Task Force Discussion
> 
> 23 Dec 2004
> 
>    See also: [2]IRC log
> 
>       [2] http://www.w3.org/2004/12/23-ws-desc-irc
> 
> Attendees
> 
>    Present
>           Dbooth, Jonathan_Marsh, GlenD, Umit
> 
>    Regrets
> 
>    Chair
>           JMarsh
> 
>    Scribe
>           Marsh
> 
> Contents
> 
>      * [3]Topics
>          1. [4]MEP Task Force Discussion (Issue LC50 and Issue LC5f)
>      * [5]Summary of Action Items
> 
>      _________________________________________________________________
> 
> MEP Task Force Discussion (Issue LC50 and Issue LC5f)
> 
>    <dbooth> GlenD: Goals of processor conformance: Allow someone to
> point
>    to the spec and complain if someone else is non-conformant. Also to
>    have a product stamped "WSDL 2.0 Conformant".
> 
>    We're discussing adding a way to mark in WSDL the difference
> between a
>    server requiring a feature and actually engaging the feature.
> 
>    I.e. A server can require a feature but then not use it.
> 
>    A client can choose whether or not to engage a non-required
> feature.
> 
>    Suggesting adding some guidance (not a marker).
> 
>    Glen: Hard to do that without adding more confusion.
> 
>    Umit: Client always wants to recieve messages in an encrypted
> fashion.
>    Not a WSDL problem.
> 
>    Glen: Has to be out of band agreement.
> 
>    DBooth: This is what I wanted to warn about. If there's an optional
>    extension, the client must be able to indicate (in-band or
>    out-of-band) whether to engage that extension.
> 
>    Marsh: So a client can't tell just from looking at a batch of WSDL
>    whether a required feature will be engaged by the server.
> 
>    Glen: No, but individual features (e.g. security), can specify how
> or
>    whether a feature will be engaged by the server, and teh client can
>    rely on that.
>    ... This guidance would be great as a note or a blog, but doesn't
> seem
>    like it should go into the spec.
>    ... Like best practices and patterns of using TCP.
> 
>    Everyone likes DBooth's definition of node.
> 
> Summary of Action Items
> 
>      _________________________________________________________________
> 
> 
>     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [6]scribe.perl 1.99 ([7]CVS
> log)
>     $Date: 2004/12/23 16:51:00 $
> 
>       [6] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribe.perl
>       [7] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/scribe.perl
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> David Booth
> W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Received on Thursday, 23 December 2004 17:01:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:33 GMT