W3C

WS Description WG Telcon

28 Apr 2005

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Charlton Barreto, webMethods
Rebecca Bergersen, IONA Technologies
Allen Brookes, Rogue Wave Software
Dave Chappell, Sonic Software
Roberto Chinnici, Sun Microsystems
Paul Downey, British Telecommunications
Youenn Fablet, Canon
Tom Jordahl, Macromedia
Jacek Kopecky, DERI Innsbruck at the Leopold-Franzens-Universitšt Innsbruck, Austria
Amelia Lewis, TIBCO
Kevin Canyang Liu, SAP
David Orchard, BEA Systems
Bijan Parsia, University of Maryland MIND Lab
Tony Rogers, Computer Associates
Arthur Ryman, IBM
Asir Vedamuthu, webMethods
Umit Yalcinalp, SAP
Regrets
Hugo Haas, W3C
Anish Karmarkar, Oracle
Jean-Jacques Moreau, Canon
Chair
Jonathan Marsh
Scribe
Allen

Contents


Action Item Review

[Note chair's notes here got eaten, some due dates may be recreated incorrectly. Chair will forgo the usual punishment for slipping AIs in this case :-).]

DONE [.5] 2004-11-10: Sanjiva will write up this proposal and email it 
                      to the list as a response to the objection, 
                      due 2005-04-20.
?*        2004-11-11: Anish to propose additions to the test suite for 
                      the purpose of interoperability testing, 
                      due 2005-04-13.
?*        2004-12-03: Glen and Asir to help craft the specfic text for
                      the editors (LC18), due 2005-04-13.
DROPPED   2005-03-10: Bijan will look at item Editors to move App C to
                      RDF Mapping spec to see if it is still relavant, 
                      due 2005-04-13.
?*        2005-03-31: Marsh to take on (or recommend closing) Bijan's AI
                      to produce a component/property table via XSLT, 
                      due 2005-04-28.

Waiting addition of property/component markup. Now due 2005-05-28.

<scribe> SCRIBE: Allen

<scribe> ACTION: Editors to introduce specialized markup for components and properties [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]

DONE [.6] 2005-03-31: Kevin to fix editorial POST/GET and safety edits,
                      due 2005-04-13. 
DUE?      2005-04-21: Arthur to review primer sec 4.1 for correctness,
                      due ?. 
DUE?      2005-04-21: Kevin to add inheritance example to primer sec 5,
                      due ?. 

Due 2005-05-05.

DUE?      2005-04-21: Kevin to do outbound interface example in primer,
                      due ?. 

Due 2005-05-05.

DONE [.6] 2005-04-21: kliu will send comment (Section 6.4) to list as
                      editorial issue, due ?. 
DUE?      2005-04-21: Hugo to check (Section 6.6) for correctness, 
                      due ?. 
DUE?      2005-04-21: GlenD to check scoping (Section 7.2) references,
                      due ?. 
DONE [.6] 2005-04-21: kliu to note issue (Section 7.9), due ?. 
DUE?      2005-04-21: Hugo fix type thing and look at rest for 
                      consistency in DaveO's examples at
                      .../wsdl20-primer.html#reservationDetails_HTTP and
                      .../wsdl20-primer.html#reservationList_HTTP_GET,
                      due ? 
DUE?      2005-04-21: Hugo to establish RDDL docs, due ?. 
DUE?      2005-04-21: Pauld to craft, publish Common Schema structures
                      to WG for review for publication as WG Note, 
                      due ?. 

Due 2005-05-28.

DUE?      2005-04-21: Hugo to take action to check with Henry if accept
                      our resolution, due ?. 
DUE?      2005-04-21: Hugo to continue to look at IRI style/URI style,
                      due ?. (LC74a) 
DUE?      2005-04-21: Asir to provide modified text of section 4.2 to
                      editors, due ? (LC120) 

Due 2005-05-08.

DUE?      2005-04-21: Tom to provide additional text to section 7, 
                      part 1, wsdlLocation, due ?. (LC59d) 

Due 2005-05-02.

DUE?      2005-04-22: Jonathan to ask WS-Addressing to ensure that they 
                      clearly specify overriding of the fault 
                      destination, due ?. (LC76a) 

Due 2005-05-02.

DUE?      2005-04-22: Glen to send a response for LC89e, due ?. 
DUE?      2005-04-22: Amy to define propogation, due ?. (LC76b) 
DONE [.4] 2005-04-22: Hugo to investigate HTTP binding and determine 
                      whether address is optional, due ?. (LC62a)
DONE [.7] 2005-04-22: Marsh to ask WS-A to review primer re: endpoint 
                      references, and to ask them for any advice about 
                      how to describe EPRs to the end of identifying 
                      which interface and/or binding are referenced just
                      from examining the description, due ?. (LC117) 
DUE?      2005-04-22: Umit to write an alternate proposal, due ? (LC117)

Due 2005-05-12.

DUE?      2005-04-22: Amy to provide examples for the advanced section 
                      of the primer. Amy to send them to Kevin and test 
                      materials to Arthur, due ?. (LC61c) 
DUE?      2005-04-22: Arthur to investigate the Schema Designators and 
                      come back with a proposal, due ?. (LC64) 

Due 2005-05-12.

DUE?      2005-04-22: Amy to investigate a solution, due ? (LC74c)

Outstanding editorial work:
DONE      2004-09-16: Editors to move App C to RDF Mapping spec, 
                      except the frag-id which will move within 
                      media-type reg appendix. 
?         2004-10-14: Editors to add a statement like: The Style 
                      property may constrain both input and output, 
                      however a particular style may constrain in only 
                      one direction. In Section 2.4.1.1 of Part 1. 
                      (subsumed by LC21 resolution?) 
?         2004-11-10: Editor remove ambiguity if it exists 
?         2005-01-19: Part 1 Editors to call out the difference between 
                      WSDL 1.1 and 2.0 in respect to single interface 
                      per service, and indicate alternatives 
?         2005-01-19: Part 1 Editors to rewrite ONMR as Best practice. 
DONE [.3] 2005-03-10: Editors to check URI and schema references in 
                      Part 1. 
DONE      2005-04-21: MTD editors to incorporate Larry's changes. 
?         2005-04-22: Editors to add "When you want to describe a 
                      message that sends an endpoint reference, create 
                      an element that restricts wsdl:EndpointType and 
                      specifies a fixed value for the @binding 
                      attribute." (LC117) 
?         2005-04-21: Editors Fix the "processor" language in 4.1.1, 
                      (LC75w) 
?         2005-04-21: Editors to make sure that inline/embedded schema 
                      used consistently and defined. (LC116) 
?         2005-04-21: Part 2 editors to define frag id extensions for 
                      soap:header, http:header, soap:module. (LC80)

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/#actions
[.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/actions.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0070.html
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0160.html
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0134.html
[.6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0166.html
[.7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Apr/0067.html

<Marsh> ACTION: Marsh to add link to primer to-do list from WG page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action02]

Administrivia

Jonathan: WS-Addressing would like last call reviews

<Marsh> ACTION: Charlton and Jacek to review WS-A by next Wed. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action03]

Jonathan: register for next face-to-face
... any objections to publishing SOAP 1.1 note?

Resolved: publish SOAP 1.1 binding note

last call issues

<scribe> ACTION: Editors LC121, LC122, LC123 fixes [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action04]

Jonathan: LC99, '#' removed at face to face. Editors point out that this is inconsistent

Arthur: value constraint property of property component has '#'

Jonathan: do we make this consistent?
... doesn't RPC style use this?
... proposals are: remove hash everywhere for component model, or add hash back in this case and live with element that cannot be expressed in syntax

Arthur: ok with hash in both places

Roberto: I like the hash in the component

Umit: agrees with Roberto

Jonathan: any objections to adding the hash back in?

Arthur: can make #other the default and allow it in syntax

Tom: +1

Asir: Address attribute has no default

Arthur: address value is URL this is an enumerated value

<pauld> chad, hi

Resolution: LC99, don't drop '#' and allow #other in schema

LC62b

<Marsh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0160.html

Hugo's proposal: add text to http binding that says that it is an error if http location is not absolute and address is absent

DaveO: maybe base address can be given and then relative URI added
... no way to connect dynamic base with relative URI in WSDL

Jonathan: if you understood EPR extension then you wouldn't need the address

Jacek: extension could set address property

Jonathan: extension could override Hugo's statement or set address property

DaveO: may not need an explicit statement. This could fail in the same way as if an incorrect address were given

Arthur: maybe this should be a SHOULD

Umit: should be clarified how we work with WS-Addressing

Jonathan: question is can we build a component model without an address component and still use it for http
... any volunteer to write extension using WS-Addressing?

<scribe> ACTION: Jonathan will draft a proposal on how to use an EPR as a WSDL extension [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action05]

Jonathan: any voluteer to modify Hugo's proposal?

Arthur: change MUST to SHOULD

Jacek: could change http binding to allow extensibility instead of saying that location is combined with address property

DaveO: very little can be said in WSDL that would enforce that at runtime an address will be set

Jonathan: no need for any new text then

Resolved: LC62b closed with no action

LC125

<Arthur> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0095.html

Arthur: components for interface and binding not consistent
... two choices to be consistent: 1) remove "interface" everywhere, 2) add interface everywhere
... preference, option 1 for brevity

Jacek: prefer option 2 to remove potential confusion with fault

<Marsh> chad, new poll

<chad> new poll

Tom: prefer option 1, likes the shorter names

<Marsh> chad, question: LC125

<RebeccaB> chad, options?

<Marsh> chad, option 1: Interface, *Fault, *Operation, MessageReference, FaultReference

<Tomj> vote: 1

<Marsh> chad, option 2: Interface, InterfaceFault, InterfaceOperation, *InterfaceMessageReference, *InterfaceFaultReference

<JacekK> vote: 2

<KevinL> vote: 1

vote: 2

<Arthur> vote: 1

<TonyR> vote: 2

<youenn> vote: 1

<RebeccaB> vote: 2

<Marsh> chad: option 0: status quo

<Arthur> vote: 1, 2

<asir> vote: 2

<RebeccaB> vote: 2

<KevinL> vote: 0, 1

<pauld> vote: 2, 1, whatever

<Roberto> vote:2

<pauld> vote: 2, 1

<uyalcina> vote: 1

<TonyR> vote: 2, 1, 0

<youenn> vote: 1,2

<pauld> chad: tonyBlair

<pauld> vote: 2, 1

<Marsh> chad: charlton: 2

<Roberto> chad: berlusconi

<Marsh> chad, count

<chad> Question: LC125

<chad> Option 0: status quo (1)

<chad> Option 1: Interface, *Fault, *Operation, MessageReference, FaultReference (4)

<chad> Option 2: Interface, InterfaceFault, InterfaceOperation, *InterfaceMessageReference, *InterfaceFaultReference (8)

<chad> 13 voters: Allen (2) , Arthur (1, 2) , asir (2) , charlton (2) , JacekK (2) , KevinL (0, 1) , pauld (2, 1) , RebeccaB (2) , Roberto (2) , Tomj (1) , TonyR (2, 1, 0) , uyalcina (1) , youenn (1, 2)

<chad> Round 1: Count of first place rankings.

<chad> Candidate 2 is elected.

<chad> Winner is option 2 - Interface, InterfaceFault, InterfaceOperation, *InterfaceMessageReference, *InterfaceFaultReference

<alewis> chad, details?

RESOLUTION: LC125 closed with Arthur's option 2 change, make components consistent by using 'interface' in each component name for interface components.

LC71

Postponed till Sanjiva is present.

LC74b

Arthur: why normalize element names?

Jonathan: its a QName
... probably will close with no action but we need to respond to comment
... we may need a note that says there may be false negatives if QNames are not normallized

<uyalcina> +1 to JM

Jonathan: since there are no volunteers propose to close with no action

Resolved: LC74b closed with no action

LC75c

Arthur: if set to true you can use http get and cache result

Jonathan: TAG wants this so we shouldn't remove it

<Arthur> +q

Roberto: should move this to an extension

<uyalcina> +1 to Roberto

DaveO: disputes that TAG mandated doing it this way

Umit: Happy DaveO clarified this. Justifies putting this in an extension.

DaveO: opposed to putting this in an extension. Better ways have been proposed.

Arthur: mistake putting this in a binding. It should be part of the abstract description. So should be an interface extension, if an extension.

Tom: wasn't in favor of putting this in spec, would be in favor of removing it.

Roberto: programmer's view, can put annotations in their code, but any side effect makes it unsafe
... need to consider what we want in core spec. Should only be core concepts. Other things should be in other parts of spec. Safety should be moved out of core spec.

<asir> +1 to Roberto, lets shrink Part 1

<Arthur> +1

PaulD: Get is very important to the web and key to what we are doing. If we put this in core people will build services differently.

<Arthur> to paul, that is

<Marsh> Chad, question: Remove {safety}?

<Marsh> Chad, option 0: status quo

<Marsh> Chad, option 1: remove it

<Marsh> Chad, option 2: move it to an extension (part 2)

Umit: presence of the TAG caused members to not speak out against this.
... safety less enforcable than RPC style which is not in part 1

<asir> vote: 1, 2

<JacekK> vote: 0, 2

<pauld> vote: 0,2

<youenn> vote: 2

vote: 2,1

<TonyR> vote: abstain

<Roberto> vote: 1, 2

<Tomj> vote: 1, 0

<RebeccaB> chad, options?

<uyalcina> vote: 2, 1

<Arthur> vote: 0, 2

<Marsh> chad, DaveO: 0

<KevinL> vote:2,0

<Marsh> chad: DaveO: 0

<RebeccaB> vote: 2,0

<alewis> vote: 1, 2

<Marsh> Chad: Charlton: 2, 0

<Marsh> vote: 1, 2

<Marsh> chad, count

<chad> Question: Remove {safety}?

<chad> Option 0: status quo (4)

<chad> Option 1: remove it (5)

<chad> Option 2: move it to an extension (part 2) (7)

<chad> 17 voters: alewis (1, 2) , Allen (2, 1) , Arthur (0, 2) , asir (1, 2) , charlton (2) , Charlton (2, 0) , DaveO (0) , JacekK (0, 2) , KevinL (2, 0) , Marsh (1, 2) , pauld (0, 2) , RebeccaB (2, 0) , Roberto (1, 2) , Tomj (1, 0) , TonyR () , uyalcina (2, 1) , youenn (2)

<chad> Round 1: Count of first place rankings.

<chad> Round 2: Eliminating candidate 0.

<chad> Candidate 2 is elected.

<chad> Winner is option 2 - move it to an extension (part 2)

<pauld> fairly even split, really

<Marsh> Title: WS Description WG Telcon

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Charlton and Jacek to review WS-A by next Wed. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Editors LC121, LC122, LC123 fixes [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Editors to introduce specialized markup for components and properties [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Jonathan will draft a proposal on how to use an EPR as a WSDL extension [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Marsh to add link to primer to-do list from WG page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/28-ws-desc-minutes.html#action02]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.122 (CVS log)
$Date: 2005/04/28 16:39:52 $