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

Agenda: 28-30 Jan 2004 WS Description WG FTF

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 14:58:45 -0800
Message-ID: <DF1BAFBC28DF694A823C9A8400E71EA202501B9F@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

[First draft, suggestions welcome!  Note some issue have not been added
to the issues list yet, I named all of these "Issue X".]

Logistics [1], dial-in numbers [2] (members only).

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/04-01-f2f.htm
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/04-01-f2f.htm#Bridge

--------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday 28 January
--------------------------------------------------------
13:00 Introductions and logistics
    - Assignment of scribes
        @@@ TBD @@@
    - Agenda bashing

13:10 Publication plan
      Survey of remaining work
        Part 1: Open issues:
                  misc (16)
                  editorial (2)
        Part 2: Open proposals:
                  Patterns TF recommendations
                Open issues:
                  none known
        Primer: ?

13:30 Faults
    - Issue X: Work through some WSDL examples to verify that Paul's
fault
      proposal [3] doesn't negatively impact bindings.
    - Issue fault-name-uniqueness [4]: Should faults be named with
QNames? 
      In WSDL 1.1 fault names are NCNames which are not unique within 
      portType even. This leads to a cumbersome mechanism to uniquely 
      identify a fault.
    - Issue 89: Binding message references in component model [5]

  [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jan/0064.html
  [4] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#xissue%20fault%20name%20uniqueness
  [5] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#89

15:00 Break
15:20 Faults (cont.)

16:30 Joint Session with Arch WG
    - Summary of Arch deliverables and areas WSDesc should be aware of
    - Use Cases document disposition
    - Issue 90: Synchronize terminology [6]
    - Issue 75: Incoherence between WSA and WSD MEPs [7]

  [6] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#90
  [7] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#75

17:30 Adjourn

-------------------------------------------------------
Thursday 29 January
-------------------------------------------------------
09:00 Attribute styles "at risk?"
    - Word from GGF on whether they still want attribute styles.
    - Issue 103: Proposal for combining the two attribute operation 
      styles to one [10, 11]

 [10] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#103
 [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Nov/0164.html

10:30 Break
10:50 Features and properties "at risk?"
    - WSChor statement [12]
    - Issue X: properties and schema languages other than XSD [13]
      If properties remain, we need to discuss requirements for a
      solution to this issue and recruit a champion.

 [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jan/0066.html
 [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jan/0006.html

12:30 Lunch
13:30 WSDL structure issues  
    - Issue 102: Schemas in imported WSDL [14]
      Review Glen's specese [15] 
    - Issue 95: service/@name required? [16]
      Options:
        a) No: remove service/@name
        b) Yes: close issue.
    - Issue 79: How much validation? [17]
      Options:
        a) In scope: need volunteer to write up a proposal.
        b) Out of scope: close issue
    
 [14] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#102
 [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jan/0017.html
 [16] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#95
 [17] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#79

15:00 Break
15:20 Binding issues:
    - Issue 80: Inappropriate binding component name [18]
      Options:
        a) Yes: come up with an alternative name.
        b) No: close issue
    - Issue 82: Relax binding syntax [19]
      Need proposal to understand the scope of this issue.
    - Issue 83: Interaction between binding extensions [20]
      Options:
        a) In scope: come up with a proposal.
        b) Out of scope: close issue.

 [18] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#80
 [19] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#82
 [20] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#83

17:30 Adjourn

-------------------------------------------------------
Friday 30 January
-------------------------------------------------------
09:00 Inheritance issues:
    - Issue 76: Pointing at derived interfaces [30]
      Options: 
        a) Yes: need volunteer to write up a proposal.
        b) No: close issue
    - Issue 81: Account for interface inheritance [31]
      Options:
        a) Yes: come up with an alternative.
        b) No: close issue      

 [30] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#76
 [31] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#81

10:30 Break
10:50 Issue X: Versioning
    - Need a survey of the problems we need to address.

12:30 Lunch
13:30 Pattern issues:
    - Issue 87: Redundant direction information [32]
      Options:
        a) Drop direction property.
        b) Retain direction property.

 [32] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#87

15:00 Break
15:20 Style issues
    - Issue 98: > 1 style per interface [33]
      Options:
        a) Yes: Make @style an (unordered?) list of URIs.
        b) No: Close issue.
    - Issue X: Jacek's promised proposal to remove style attribute 
      and handle this using normal extensibility.

 [33] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#98

16:00 Media type TF report (preliminary) [34]

 [34]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-media-types/2004Jan/0001.h
tml

16:30 Planning for remaining Part 1 issues.
    - Issue 96: Support for SOAP intermediaries [35]
      Need an analysis on whether there are issues here.
    - Issue 97: Schema language for SOAP encoding [36]
      If such a language appears, what status would we give it?
    - Issue 104: Appendix E cleanup [37]
    - Issue X: Using RDF in WSDL [38]

 [35] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#96
 [36] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#97
 [37] http://tinyurl.com/ysgl#104
 [38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003May/0076.html

17:00 Adjourn
Received on Tuesday, 20 January 2004 17:59:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:28 GMT