See also: IRC log
<dbooth> Scribe: sanjiva
<dbooth> ScribeNick: scribe
Minutes approved with no corrections
<sanjiva> ScribeNick: sanjiva
F&P composition done
media type document: updated version coming soon
<dbooth> dbooth: Get me your sections ASAP!
I18n issues related to media type stuff
discussion whether adding negotiation stuff into media type description is a good idea .. the basic requirement is description, not negotiation
"normalized value" means XML normalization not things like case equality .. so the spec needs to make that clear
considered editorial .. Umit will follow up
component model discussion .. talking about arthur's proposal to move properties have [in scope] kind of notion
<asir> +1 to the first part of Arthur's proposal
no objections to adopting arthur's proposal to consistify f&p for interfaces
<Marsh> RESOUTION: Adopt Arthur's proposal 2005Feb/0068
z notation starts with component model; so very direct mapping of say interface components to the z interface schema. Additional constraints become z variables, e.g., in scope properties and in scope features. Arthur is writing logical formulae for computing these. Question is whether to make these directly in the component model and thereby remove Arthur's fun of wriitng these formulae.
Advantage is that this makes it analogous to how the Infoset namespace stuff works.
Asir: not convinced [in scope] will really help
[lots of explanation of family hierarchies and how things are computed; sure sounded complicated]
<uyalcina> +1 to asir
<kliu> +1 to asir
glen: points out that it may be easier to have a method that computes
roberto: agrees with asir.
umit: agrees with roberto
<Roberto> +1 for fixing the interface component
<asir> +1 for fixing the interface component
daveO: wonders whether people want to keep the component model closer to the input syntax and have other stuff be addon functions on the component model
objection to dropping proposal to add inscope f&p? nope
proposal from arthur: un-flatten operations and faults in interfaces so that the component model only shows the ops that are immediately declared in the current interface and others have to be found by looking at the super interfaces
no objections to adopting arthur's proposal
<bijan> Where are the results?
<bijan> The Bijan Option Rules!
<asir> thanks Bijan
<bijan> You are quite welcome :)
<Marsh> ACTION: Marsh to appoint an editor to publish Appendix E as a WG Note. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/24-ws-desc-minutes#action01]
<dbooth> Prevailing option: "Publish the material in Appendix E as a WG Note."
LC70 resolution: appendix E to become a note
I have to drop off .. can someone else take over please?
<inserted> Scribe: Kevin
<inserted> ScribeNick: kliu
see you sanjiva, I will pick up from here
<sanjiva> thanks Kevin .. bye
discussion on whether we should say something about parallel schema definitions
amy: why not
arthur: does that mean we allow two different schemas define a same Qname?
amy: if there are mulitple type
definition in use, presumably you should have some semantics
attached to help decide which one should be used
... we don't define that, not saying we can't
DaveO: does schema has the same problem that defintions of same thing in different place?
asir: don't know
jmarsh: we have explored that with wsdl1.1 and 20
arthur: each type system has its own element declaration component
jacek: it might be slight inconsistency
<asir> James Clark has a mechanism to mix schema languages - see http://www.thaiopensource.com/relaxng/nrl.html
what happens if one use element, another use owl attribute
we may say something in the spec that if there are mulitple pointers in the message to different schema declarations there might be problems
asir: we can make it simple by ruling out multiple schema languages
jmarsh: is that a desirable way to go?
asir: there should be only one schema pointer in use
jmarsh: there are a few options, postpone to f2f
<Zakim> dbooth, you wanted to propose we include a note in the spec saying that if someone combines multiple schema languages may be a problem, and we have not solved this problem.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.115 of Date: 2005/02/15 22:31:37 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/to/two/ Succeeded: s/amy:/amy,/ Succeeded: s/arthur:/arthur,/ Succeeded: s/out/out multiple/ Succeeded: s/<kliu> amy,/<kliu> amy:/g Succeeded: s/<kliu> arthur,/<kliu> arthur:/g Succeeded: s/<kliu> do,/<kliu> DaveO:/g Succeeded: s/<kliu> asir,/<kliu> asir:/g Succeeded: s/<kliu> jmarsh,/<kliu> jmarsh:/g Succeeded: s/Marsh to appoint an editor to that/Marsh to appoint an editor to publish Appendix E as a WG Note/ Succeeded: s/<kliu> jack,/<kliu> jacek:/g Succeeded: i/Scribe: sanjiva/Topic: Administrivia Succeeded: i/see you sanjiva/Scribe: Kevin Succeeded: i/see you sanjiva/ScribeNick: kliu Found Scribe: sanjiva Found ScribeNick: scribe Found ScribeNick: sanjiva Found Scribe: Kevin Found ScribeNick: kliu Scribes: sanjiva, Kevin ScribeNicks: scribe, sanjiva, kliu Default Present: Rebecca_Bergersen, +1.301.768.aaaa, Dbooth, sanjiva, Adi_Sakala, GlenD, Jonathan_Marsh, Arthur, Allen, Hugo, Jacek, Asir, KevinL, Anish, Roberto, Tony_Rogers, Umit, Canon, +1.480.239.aabb, Jean-Jacques, Amelia_Lewis, Dale, bijan, DOrchard, J.Mischkinsky Present: Rebecca_Bergersen +1.301.768.aaaa Dbooth sanjiva Adi_Sakala GlenD Jonathan_Marsh Arthur Allen Hugo Jacek Asir KevinL Anish Roberto Tony_Rogers Umit Canon +1.480.239.aabb Jean-Jacques Amelia_Lewis Dale bijan DOrchard J.Mischkinsky Got date from IRC log name: 24 Feb 2005 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2005/02/24-ws-desc-minutes People with action items: marsh WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]