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

Minutes: 1 July 2004 WS Desc telcon

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 15:18:43 -0700
Message-ID: <DF1BAFBC28DF694A823C9A8400E71EA2041DE769@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Web Services Description" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Minutes 1 July 2004 telcon
Web Service Description Working Group

Present:
 David Booth            W3C
 Allen Brookes          Rogue Wave Software
 Ugo Corda              SeeBeyond
 Paul Downey            British Telecommunications
 Youenn Fablet          Canon
 Hugo Haas              W3C
 Tom Jordahl            Macromedia
 Jacek Kopecky          DERI
 Amelia Lewis           TIBCO
 Kevin Canyang Liu      SAP
 Jonathan Marsh         Chair (Microsoft)
 Josephine Micallef     Telcordia/SAIC 
 Dale Moberg            Cyclone Commerce
 Jean-Jacques Moreau    Canon
 Mark Nottingham        BEA Systems
 Igor Sedukhin          Computer Associates
 William Vambenepe      Hewlett-Packard
 Asir Vedamuthu         webMethods
 Sanjiva Weerawarana    IBM
 Umit Yalcinalp         Oracle
 Prasad Yendluri        webMethods, Inc.

Regrets:
 Helen Chen             Agfa-Gevaert N. V.
 Roberto Chinnici       Sun Microsystems
 Glen Daniels           Sonic Software
 Peter Madziak          Agfa-Gevaert N. V.
 Jeff Mischkinsky       Oracle
 David Orchard          BEA Systems
 Bijan Parsia           University of Maryland MIND Lab
 Arthur Ryman           IBM
 Adi Sakala             IONA Technologies
 Jerry Thrasher         Lexmark

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Agenda

1.  Assign scribe.  Lucky minute taker for this week is one of:
      Adi Sakala, Jean-Jacques Moreau, Umit Yalcinalp,
      Igor Sedukhin, Dale Moberg, Paul Downey, Hugo Haas

Jean-Jacques Moreau

--------------------------------------------------------------------
2.  Approval of minutes:
  - June 24 [.1] 

[.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0257.html

Approved.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
3.  Review of Action items [.1].
PENDING   2004-04-01: Marsh will get schema tf going.
?ED       2004-05-19: Editors to include in the primer an example 
                      that uses MTOM.  (Issue 72) 
?ED       2004-05-20: Editors to incorporate Hugo's full potato 
                      proposal.  (Issue 54)
?ED       2004-05-20: David Orchard to update HTTP binding to 
                      include discussion of how to generate an 
                      accepts header from schema annotations 
                      conformant to the media types extension 
                      document, and to use outputSerialization 
                      based on that information.  
?ED       2004-05-21: Editors to add ednotes to the spec to 
                      indicate areas that had contention.  (Issue 
                      190)
PENDING   2004-05-21: DaveO to write up a scenario to motivate path
                      creation on a per-operation basis.  (Issue 
                      190)
?ED       2004-05-27: Editors to add http:faultSerialization 
                      attribute.
PENIDNG   2004-05-27: DaveO will write up better description of 
                      this issue (189).
?ED       2004-06-10: Editors should correct issues 208, 213, 
                      215, come back to WG if there are any 
                      questions.
DONE [.2] 2004-06-17: alewis to champion 197.
DONE [.7] 2004-06-17: jmarsh to draft proposal to make wsdl strings 
                      refer to xml 1.1 and clarifying note.
?ED       2004-06-17: Editor action to check that multiple style 
                      values are allowed.
?ED       2004-06-17: Editors to adopt Mark's proposal for 216, but 
                      reword using MUST.
?ED       2004-06-17: Editors to incorporate editorial fix addressing 
                      issue 222.
DONE [.4] 2004-06-17: Mark come up with a proposal for extension 
                      property namespacing.
?ED       2004-06-17: Editors to incorporate proposed resolution for 
                      223 and 224.
?ED       2004-06-17: Editors to incorporate David Booth's clarification
                      in section 8.3.
DONE [.6] 2004-06-24: Jacek to repackage XMLP LC comments and send 
                      them to the XMLP group on WS-Desc's behalf.
PENDING   2004-06-24: David O will update his proposal for adding 
                      async capability.
DONE [.3] 2004-06-24: Editors to add f&p in services and endpoints,
                      and message reference, fault reference, and 
                      binding message reference components. 
PENDING   2004-06-24: Editors to synchronize specs, schema, 
                      pseudo-schema on where f&p can appear.
PENDING   2004-06-24: Editors to incorporate Jonathan's resolution 
                      to issue 160. 
DONE [.5] 2004-06-24: DaveO to re-present useOperationWebMethod 
                      proposal. 
DONE [.5] 2004-06-24: DaveO to re-present webMethod syntax issue. 
PENDING   2004-06-24: Editors to fix media-type reg frag id link, 
                      per 209.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/#actions
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0297.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0267.html
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0292.html
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0288.html
[.6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0261.html
[.7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0258.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
4.  Administrivia
  a. - August 2-4 (London)
       Logistics [.1], registration [.2].
     - September 14-16 (Toronto) [.3]
     - November (West Coast) 8-10 webMethods Sunnyvale, CA.

ACTION: JMarsh to explore Nov 10-12.

  b. WSDL 2.0 Last Call game plan [.5]
     - 2 hour telcons again next week.

2h telcon next week

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/04-08-f2f.htm
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2004Mar/0064.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2004May/0000.html
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0109.html
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0108.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
5.  Task Force Status.
 a. Media type description
  - 1st Working Draft Published [.1]
 b. MTOM/XOP
  - Last Call Published [.2]
 c. QA & Testing
  - Suggested QA plan [.3]
  - More details from Arthur [.4]
  - Interop bake-off
 d. Schema versioning
  - Waiting to hear back from Schema on my draft "charter."
  - Henry's validate-twice write-up [.5]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xml-media-types-20040608/
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0052.html
[.3]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/att-0029/QA_Oper
ational_Checklist.htm
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0037.html
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0019.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
6.  New Issues.  Issues list [.1].
  - Namespacing component properties (Mark) [.2]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0292.html

<asir> an example is "propref comp="ed" prop="type definition"/>"
<asir> here is an example is "<propref comp="mg" prop="particles"/>"
<mnot> relative URIs also seem possible, and simpler than an entity.

Need better cross-references between Part 3 and 1.
RESOLUTION: Agreed to add cross-references, no issue number needed.
ACTION: DBooth to provide a sample (<x-specref>?)
ACTION: Editors to add cross-references for component properties, per
DBooth's example.

------------------------------------------------------------------
7.  Issue 135: WSDL Specification readability (editorial) [.1]
  - Proposed resolution from Yaron [.2]
  - Postpone? (DaveO to champion?)

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x135
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Mar/0059.html

Postponed

------------------------------------------------------------------
8.  Issue 158: Setting HTTP headers in the HTTP binding [.1]
  - Postpone? (DaveO, Glen to champion)

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x158

Postponed

------------------------------------------------------------------
9.  Issue 159: Messages with mixed Body content or multiple element 
               content [.1]
  - Do we want this facility?  If so, we'll action someone to suggest
    a syntax.  If not, we'll close the issue.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x159

Anyone in favour of adding support for messages with mixed Body?
Hugo:    Is this supported by SOAP 1.2?
Sanjiva: Informally from Noah, no preference one way or the other
DaveO:   Any one in favour?
Jack:    Support for simplicity of implementation
More general support from Umit, TomJ
Marsh:   Propose close with no action
MarkN:   Bring to XMLP's attention? Or editorial note
Hugo:    +1
Marsh:   Ask editors to add editorial note that mixed content in the 
         body is not supported?
ACTION:  Editors to add note pointing out that our SOAP 
         binding only allows a single element in the body.
RESOLUTION: Close 159

------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Issue 168: Which operation [.1]
  - DBooth revived the thread at [.2]
  - Analysis at [.3]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x168
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0112.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0300.html


DaveB:   Feedback from WG?
TomJ:    Option 2 or 3
Hugo:    Proposal to add abstract feature (the operation name 
         specification feature) which provides a mean to identify 
         which operation a received message corresponds to. This is 
         useful in the absence of a UID.
<pauld> Hugo's proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0295.html
Umit:    Willing to provide a proposal
Marsh:   Along the lines of Hugo's proposal?
Umit:    Will also cover how the mechanism is implemented
Marsh:   Willing to see proposal for next week's telcon
Hugo:    Will away until next week
<dbooth> As a somewhat more flexible variation of Hugo's proposal, we
could say something like:
<dbooth> [[
<dbooth> If the GED's are not unique, then the WSD MUST contain a
required extension or required Feature that defines how the
wsdl:operation @name can be determined by the message recipient."
<dbooth> ]]
Marsh:   To be considered by Umit and Hugo for next week
ACTION: Umit to write up a proposal on 168 by weekend
Issue postponed until next week.

------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Issue 189: Binding message content to URI [.1]
  - Awaiting issue explanation from DaveO.
  - Postpone?

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x189

Postponed

------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Issue 195: Property value merging [.1]
  - We have a property composition model [.2]
  - We don't have a language that helps navigate properties [.3]
  - Postpone?

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x195
[.2]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?cont
ent-type=text/html%3B0charset=utf-8#Property_composition_model
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004May/0040.html

ACTION:  JMarsh to contact DaveO on whether issue 195 is on composition 
         model or on developing a language.
JJM:     Glen pointed out that essentially any XML language has its own 
         data model and (in principle) needs a navigation language. 
         WSDL 2.0 does independently of f&p.
Sanjiva: Navigation language is probably out of scope at this stage.
JJM:     +1
Marsh:   Thinks so; wanted to get feedback from the group.
Marsh:   Let's ask DaveO next week.


------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Issue 197: Don't override interface feature requiredness in 
               binding [.1]
  - Amy's proposal for @fixed [.2]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x197
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0297.html

Sanjiva:  Similar to "final"
DaveB:    For catching errors?
Sanjiva:  Would prevent a binding from turning off a feature declared in

          binding to be on?
Amy:      Yes
Sanjiva:  Hence solves a different problem
Umit:     Agree with Sanjiva, if interface marked as transactional,
should 
          not be changeable in binding
Amy:      At f2f, decided to go with narrow-scope rules
Marsh:    Umit's solution sounded simpler (required cannot be changed to

          non-required)
<dbooth>  JJM: We allow people to shoot themselves in the foot.  Do we 
          need to prevent WSDL writers from making this kind of mistake?
Amy:      Would not want to change the rules for requiredness from
scoping
Sanjiva:  Alternative to disallow overriding in binding what is in the 
          interface
Amy:      Strongly oppose
Umit:     In favour of mechanism now
Amy:      Issue originally came from implementors of WSDL-to-code or 
          code-to-WSDL
Sanjiva:  Now more complex: required AND fixed
Marsh:    Does solving the problem justify adding the complexity?
Straw poll: Adopt ANY solution or NONE?
<Marsh>   Yes, 2; No 5; 11 abstains.
Umit:     Abstain means nothing in this context
JJM:      +1
Marsh:    Objecting to adding to primer a note saying essentially "Note
          that overriding in the binding features required at the
interface
          can cause unexpected results."
Marsh:    Objection to closing 197 w/ no action other than primer?
RESOLUTION: Close issue 197 with primer material only.
No objection
<dbooth> ACTION: DBooth to add sentence in the primer (per issue 197)
saying that the scoping rules for requiredness allow the value of the
@required attribute to be changed, and therefore the writer should
consider whether it is wise to change a value that was set elsewhere by
someone else.

------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Issue 210: Refine equivalence algorithm [.1]
  - Mark's proposals [.2, .3]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x210
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0195.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0199.html

Marsh:   Is 0199 an addendum or complete replacement for 0195?
MarkN:   The 2 proposals are complimentary
Asir:    Should refer to the character model spec for equivalence
<asir>   Link is
http://www.w3.org/International/Group/charmod-edit/charmod2
Marsh:   Any objection to adopt MarkN's 2 proposals, with Asir amendment
to 
         refer to the character model spec?
No objection.
RESOLUTION: Close issue 210 by adopting Mark's two proposals, and 
         referencing the charmod for string equivalence.
ACTION:  Editors to incorporate Mark's proposals 2004Jun/0195.html
         and 2004Jun/0199.html, and a reference to the charmod
         (Issue 210)

------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Issue 211: Omit interface message in binding? [.1]
  - Mark's proposal [.2]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x211
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0194.html

Sanjiva:  This comes down from still having input and output to 
          support the simple case.
Amy:      Withdraw earlier comment then, but have problem with the 
          Language.
Sanjiva:  Editorial
Marsh:    Would like MarkN to revise the wording
ACTION:   Mark to reword his proposal on 211 to make it more readable
RESOLUTION: Make issue 211 editorial

------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Issue 218: Justify interface faults. [.1]
  - Paul's proposal [.2]
  - Mark's ed suggestion [.3]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x218
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0219.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0276.html

MarkN: Some editorial suggestions pointed out by email
Marsh: Any objection to closing w/ MarkN's amendments and note that 
       errors are an open set?
Marsh: (Open set came from WS-I)
No objection
RESOLUTION Close 218 with Paul's text + Mark's amendment + note that 
        errors are an open set.
ACTION: Editors to incorporate solution proposed in 2004Jun/0276.html
        including Mark's amendment, plus note that errors are an open
        set. (Issue 218)

------------------------------------------------------------------
Leftovers:
------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Issue 130: Need async request/response HTTP binding [.1]
  - WG in favor of adding such a MEP, with some expressing a desire
    that this be as lightweight as possible.
  - Revived proposal [.2]
  - Postpone?

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x130
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0287.html

Postponed

------------------------------------------------------------------
18. webMethod issues:
  - Issue 169: Syntax for webMethod - property or attribute? [.1]
  - Issue 229: useOperationWebMethod proposal [.2]
  - DaveO's proposal [.3]
  - Postpone?

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x169
[.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x229
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0288.html

Postponed

------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Issue 214: Refine "properties" terminology [.1]
  - Intractable? [.2]
  - Mark's suggestion [.3]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x214
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0234.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0270.html

Marsh:  Proposal to close w/ no change
RESOLUTION Close 214 with no change.

------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Issue 219: Actual value vs. normalized value [.1]
  - Change actual value to [normalized value]?

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x219

<asir>  The phrase actual value is used to refer to the member of the 
        value space of the simple type definition associated with an
        attribute information item which corresponds to its 
        *normalized value*. This will often be a string, but may also 
        be an integer, a boolean, a URI reference, etc.
<asir>  - from XML Schema Part 1
<asir>  link to http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#key-vv
MarkN:  Could refer to Schema's definition
<mnot>  The phrase actual value is used to refer to the member of the
value space of the simple type definition associated with an attribute
information item which corresponds to its B7normalized valueB7.
<mnot>  http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#key-vv
Marsh:  Hearing proposal either import or include definition 
        (TBD by editors)
No objection
RESOLUTION: Close 219 by including or importing the defn of actual 
            value from XML schema.
ACTION: Editors to include or import defn of "actual value" from XML
Schema.

------------------------------------------------------------------
21. Issue 220: Document interface extension semantics [.1]
  - Need concrete proposal - suggest deferring.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x220

Need concrete proposal
Marsh:  Suggest MarkN raises a new thread, w/ the aim of having a 
        proposal ready by next week
ACTION: MarkN to start a thread on 220 with the intent to get a 
        proposal by next week

------------------------------------------------------------------
22. Issue 225: Non-XML type system extensibility. [.1]
  - Mark's revised proposals [.2]
  - Roberto's preferred text [.3] 

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x225
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0174.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0169.html

Marsh:  Apart from introductory text, is the rest acceptable?
MarkN:  Accept proposal with editorial license?
Marsh:  Accept proposal 1?
TomJ:   Proposal 1 is just clarifications, NOT changes to the spec
<Marsh> I charactarized Proposal 1 as just clarifications.
No objection to adopting proposal 1
RESOLUTION (1 of 3) Accept Proposal 1, with ed license (see Roberto's 
           suggestion)
ACTION: Editors to incorporate Mark's proposal #1, with ed license (see
        Roberto's suggestion) (Issue 225)

Proposal 2
MarkN:   Can't stick in a non-XML type definition in the <type> element
Sanjiva: Yes, could stick Java in there
MarkN:   Read the spec differently
MarkN:   Would like to explore this next week
DBooth:  Maybe should reword this part of the spec if unclear
ACTION:  MarkN to investigate type wording, to ensure non-infoset type
         systems are allowed in <types>  (Issue 225 part 2).

<Marsh> Accept proposal 3.
RESOLUTION: (3 of 3) Accept Proposal 3.

------------------------------------------------------------------
23. Issue 112: New headers/body style? [.1]
  - AD feature proposal (Dave, Glen, Yaron) [.2]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x112
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0225.html

Postponed

------------------------------------------------------------------
24. Issue 177: Normative dependence on XML Schema 1.0 precludes 
               XML 1.1 [.1]
  - Concrete proposal [.2]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x177
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0258.html

Postponed.

------------------------------------------------------------------
25. Issue 212: Explain using bindings across all operations [.1]
  - Mark proposes closing with no action.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x212
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0198.html

Marsh: Any objection to closing?
RESOLUTION: Close 212 with no action

------------------------------------------------------------------
Remaining open issues:
- (ed) 208 Misc. editorial comments
- (ed) 213 Refine component model property constraints
- (ed) 215 Clarify rule obviation
- 227 Description of Binding Operation component
- 228 Should f&p be allowed in more places? 
- 230 {label} vs. {message label}
- 235 Definition of Fault
- 231 Clarify "patterns" 
- 232 Differentiate our MEPs from underlying protocol MEPs
- 233 Dynamically override Fault destination? 
- 234 Ruleset terminology
- 226 Cross-binding HTTP features 

Marsh: Editorial: 227, 235, 231, 234
Marsh: Will send email to ask for editorial closing
Received on Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:18:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:31 GMT