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

RE: Agenda,6 May 2004 WS Desc telcon

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 15:06:32 -0700
Message-ID: <32D5845A745BFB429CBDBADA57CD41AF07417085@ussjex01.amer.bea.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

regrets, in transit over the arctic at the time.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh
> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 10:37 PM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: Agenda,6 May 2004 WS Desc telcon
> 
> 
> 
> 0.  Dial in information (members only) [.1]:
> 
> See the public WG page [.2] for pointers to current documents 
> and other
> information, and the private page [.3] for administrative matters.
> 
> If you have additions to the agenda, please email them to the WG list
> before the start of the telcon.
> 
> [.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2004May/0002.html
> [.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/
> [.3] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/admin
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Agenda
> 
> 1.  Assign scribe.  Lucky minute taker for this week is one of:
>       Jeff Mischkinsky, Asir Vedamuthu, Glen Daniels, 
>       Roberto Chinnici, Amy Lewis, Erik Ackerman, Adi Sakala, 
>       Arthur Ryman
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 2.  Approval of minutes:
>   - April 22th [.1]
>   - April 29th [.2]
> 
> [.1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/att-00
> 85/22-ws-d
> esc-irc.html
> [.2]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/att-00
> 88/040429-
> ws-desc-irc.htm
>   
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 3.  Review of Action items [.1].
> DONE [.2] 2004-01-08: Pauld to write up examples of schemas for the
>                       Primer.
> ?         2004-01-28: Philippe and JMarsh will look at the ipr for 
>                       test suite.
> ?         2004-02-12: DaveO to produce a refined proposal for Asynch 
>                       HTTP binding addressing the concerns of folks 
>                       that object to leaving replyTo info out of WSDL.
> ?         2004-04-01: Marsh will get schema tf going.
> ?         2004-04-29: Arthur to write up concerns about XML 1.1 
>                       implications on WSDL 2.0 for potential 
>                       forwarding to XML WG.
> DONE [.3] 2004-04-29: Hugo to redraft DaveO's proposal for extensible
> HTTP
>                       operations.
> DONE [.4] 2004-04-29: Marsh to add an issue on describing the XML
> version 
>                       of SOAP messages.
> ?         2004-04-29: Umit to work with Anish to create a 
> working draft
> on 
>                       media types ready for our May F2F meeting in 
>                       NYC.
> ?         2004-04-29: Part 1 editors to adopt Jacek's "purpose of the 
>                       binding" text, without "interchangeable"
> endpoints,
>                       and using "confidentiality" (or 
> similar) instead 
>                       of TLS.
> 
> [.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/#actions
> [.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004May/0007.html
> [.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0093.html
> [.4] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x171
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 4.  Administrivia
>   a. Upcoming FTFs
>      - May 19, 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM
>        May 20, 8:00 AM - 12:00 PM
>                1:30 PM - 3:30 PM testing task force meeting?
>        May 21, 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM
>        Hosted by IBM in NYC [.1], registration open [.2]
>      - August 2-4 (London)
>        Logistics [.3], registration [.4].
>      - September 14-16 (Toronto) [.5]
> 
> [.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/04-05-f2f.htm
> [.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34041/WSD0405/
> [.3] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/04-08-f2f.htm
> [.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2004Mar/0064.html
> [.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2004May/0000.html
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 5.  Task Force Status.
>  a. Media type description
>   - Draft of first WD for WG approval by May FTF.
>  b. QA & Testing
>   - Suggested QA plan [.1]
>   - More details from Arthur [.2]
>  c. Schema versioning
>   - Waiting to hear back from Schema on my draft "charter."
>   - Henry's validate-twice write-up [.3]
> 
> [.1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/att-00
> 29/QA_Oper
> ational_Checklist.htm
> [.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0037.html
> [.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0019.html
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 6.  New Issues.  Issues list [.1].
>   - Issue 172: Syntax improvement for soap fault bindings 
> (Sanjiva) [.2]
> 
> [.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html
> [.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0081.html
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 7.  Issue 54: Allow binding to any HTTP method [.1]
>   - Hugo's original proposal [.2]
>   - DaveO's original proposal [.3]
>   - Hugo's combined proposal [.4]
> 
> [.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x54
> [.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0042.html
> [.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0055.html
> [.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0093.html
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 8.  HTTP Features review.
>   - David's analysis [.1]. Summary:
>     - Request-Method                       already described
>     - Request-URI                          already described
>     - HTTP Version                         probably useful
>     - Response Status                      probably useful 
>     - Content coding                       probably useful
>     - Transfer Codings (Chunked encoding)  probably useful
>     - Persistent connections               probably not useful
>     - Redirection                          probably useful
>     - Authentication                       probably useful
>     - SSL                                  probably useful
>     - From                                 probably not useful
>     - Caching (Vary, etc.)                 probably useful
>     - Content Negotiation                  probably useful 
>     - Host                                 already described
>     - Content-Range                        not useful
>     - If-*                                 not useful
>     - Max-Forwards                         not useful
>     - Expect                               not useful
>     - Upgrade                              not useful
>     - Via                                  not useful
>     - Warning                              not useful
>     - Allow                                probably not useful
>     - Content-Language                     not useful
>     - Content-Location                     not useful
>     - Content-MD5                          not useful
>     - Date                                 not useful
>     - Etag                                 not useful
>     - Expires                              not useful
>     - Last-Modified                        not useful
>     - Referrer                             not useful
>     - Retry-After                          not useful
>     - Server, User-Agent                   probably not useful
>     - Partial Content                      not useful
>     - Content-disposition                  probably not useful
>     - PICS, P3P                            not useful
>     - SoapAction                           already described
>     - Cookies                              probably useful
>     - WebDAV                               probably not useful
>     - Delta Encoding                       ?
> 
> [.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0083.html
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 9.  SOAP 1.2 Binding
>   - Review Jean-Jacques' schema [.1, .2] outlining an overall approach
>     to the binding.
>   - Issue 172: Simplify code/subcode syntax [.3]
>     - Sanjiva's proposal [.4]
>     - Roberto's amendment [.5]
> 
> [.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Mar/0295.html
> [.2]
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20
-bindings.
html#_soap_binding_syntax
[.3] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x172
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0081.html
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004May/0001.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
HTTP Features - Scheduled for future telcons, dependent on overall
                review of HTTP features.
------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Issue 165: Adding HTTPS support [.1]
  - Still debating whether to put a specific marker in the binding 
    re: https (probably delay this; group with other HTTP features.)

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x165

------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Issue 147: HTTP binding uses static content-type header [.1]
  - "... we can today describe operations using messages 
    consisting in XHTML or SVG documents. Using the HTTP binding, 
    these messages will have the "application/xml" mime type 
    while it would be more appropriate to use more precise mime 
    types ("application/xhtml+xml" or "image/svg+xml" for
    instance). Therefore, it might be good to be able to set the 
    mime type to use for a given message, at least at the HTTP 
    binding level ..."

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x147

------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Issue 55: Define binding to HTTP headers [.1]
  - Do we want such capability?

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x55

------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Issue 56: Define means to specify an authentication requirement [.1]
  - attempt to clarify commentor's intent

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x56
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0033.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Issue 164: Support for HTTP chunking and other HTTP options [.1]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x164

------------------------------------------------------------------
Scheduled for future telcons
------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Effort to simplify our spec.
  - DavidB [.1] and Jonathan [.2] have provided some data points.
  - Arthur's suggestion [.3]

[.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Mar/0162.html
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0006.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Apr/0028.html
Received on Wednesday, 5 May 2004 18:06:41 GMT

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