W3C

Web Services Description WG

10 Mar 2005

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
David Booth, W3C
Roberto Chinnici, Sun Microsystems
Glen Daniels, Sonic Software
Paul Downey, British Telecommunications
Youenn Fablet, Canon
Hugo Haas, W3C
Tom Jordahl, Macromedia
Anish Karmarkar, Oracle
Jacek Kopecky, DERI Innsbruck at the Leopold-Franzens-Universitšt Innsbruck, Austria
Amelia Lewis, TIBCO
Kevin Canyang Liu, SAP
Jonathan Marsh, Chair/Microsoft
Dale Moberg, Cyclone Commerce
Jean-Jacques Moreau, Canon
David Orchard, BEA Systems
Bijan Parsia, University of Maryland MIND Lab
Tony Rogers, Computer Associates
Arthur Ryman, IBM
Adi Sakala, IONA Technologies
Sanjiva Weerawarana, IBM
Umit Yalcinalp, SAP
Regrets
Allen Brookes, Rogue Wave Software
Asir Vedamuthu, webMethods
Chair
JMarsh
Scribe
TomJ

Contents


 

 

<dbooth> Scribe: TomJ

Approval of minutes

Jonathan: Did everyone get a chance to look at the F2F minutes?

Feb 24? no objection to approving them

F2F - will wait till next week.

Review of Action items

3.  Review of Action items [.1].  Editorial actions [.2].

?         2004-04-01: Marsh will get schema tf going.
?         2004-09-02: Bijan to create stylesheet to generate a
                      table of components and properties.
HOLD      2004-09-16: Editors to move App C to RDF Mapping spec, 
                      except the frag-id which will move 
                      within media-type reg appendix.
?         2004-09-16: Editors to fix paragraph 6-9 of section 
                      2.1.1 moved into 2.1.2
                      which talks about the syntax.
?         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.
RETIRED   2004-11-09: DaveO to work on text for option 
                      3 (redefining conformance in terms 
                      of building the component model) 
                      (LC5f)
?         2004-11-09: DaveO will recast the @compatibleWith 
                      proposal using an extension namespace. 
                      (LC54)
DONE [.7] 2004-11-10: Sanjiva to write the rationale for 
                      rejecting LC75a
?         2004-11-10: Glen will post an e-mail describing 
                      the compromise proposal on formal objections.
?         2004-11-10: Editor remove ambiguity if it exists
?         2004-11-10: Sanjiva will write up this proposal 
                      and email it to the list as a response 
                      to the objection.
?         2004-11-11: Anish to propose additions to the 
                      test suite for the purpose of 
                      interoperability testing.
RETIRED   2004-11-18: Mini-task force to propose one or two 
                      proposals for the group for LC5f.
?         2004-12-03: Glen and Asir to help craft the specific text 
                      for the editors (LC18).
MOVED     2004-12-03: Glen to send example on feature stuff for primer
DONE [.3] 2005-01-06: MTD Editors to add note saying content-type
                      is not sufficient, information to be 
                      provided via other mechanism, for 
                      example xsi:type"
DONE [.3] 2005-01-06: MTD editors implement proposal 2 for issue 
                      260.
?         2005-01-06: Umit? to respond to Larry, "not dynamic, 
                      other solutions equally bad, not 
                      recommendation track, if problems
                      happy to consider those"
DONE [.3] 2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      implement issue 261 resolution 
DONE [.3] 2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      implement issue 262 resolution 
DONE [.3] 2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      implement 262 and 273
?         2005-01-13: Part 1 Editors to incorporate the text 
                      at 2004Dec/0022.html.
MOVED     2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      resolve 275 editorially 
?         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 [.4] 2005-01-20: Asir to think about mU and possibly 
                      propose some clarification text
DONE [.9]  2005-01-20: Arthur to come up with primer text 
                      to show fault reuse and fault code.
DONE [.4] 2005-02-03: Asir to work with primer eds on SOAP 1.1
                      example.
?         2005-02-03: Part 1 editors to incorporate text from 
                      Jan/0026 and Feb/0006.
DONE [.6] 2005-02-17: Asir to review table on how import and include 
                      actually work (added by JJM) 
DONE [.5] 2005-02-17: Umit and Anish to complete editorial work on 
                      media type description before ftf
?         2005-02-17: Jacekk to help Bijan advance the RDF mapping work
DONE [.8] 2005-03-03: Jonathan to formalize the CR criteria bag and 
                      drop "testing type system extensibility" into it 
?         2005-03-03: Jonathan will ask the WG what is the publication 
                      plan for the type system note around 3/17. 
?         2005-03-03: Asir to double check the subissues of 76d to 
                      see if they should be raised as issues and to 
                      do so. 
DONE [.10] 2005-03-04: Umit to add a warning along the lines of: 
                      "The intent of the expectedMediaType attribute 
                      is to allow WSDL authors to indicate the range 
                      of media types that are acceptable for the 
                      binary data for which it is defined for, hence 
                      it serves as an design time indicator for 
                      possible contentType values that are expected.
                      Therefore, authors are recommended to use wild 
                      cards with care, and recommended to indicate the 
                      list of media types if the set is limited." 
DONE [.3] 2005-03-04: Media type editors to rename xmlmime: to xmime 
?         2005-03-04: Editors to merge parts 2 and 3, move the rpc 
                      style from part 1 into it and name the result 
                      "Adjuncts". 
?         2005-03-04: Roberto to come up with a proposal for LC75g
                      (wildcards in rpc style)

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/#actions
[.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/actions.html
[.3] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/media-types/xml-media-types.html
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2005Feb/0033.html
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Mar/0003.html
[.6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Feb/0073.html
[.7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Feb/0074.html
[.8] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/CRCriteria.html
[.9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Mar/0031.html
[.10] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/media-types/xml-media-types.html

Editors to move App C to RDF Mapping spec: HOLD

<scribe> ACTION: Bijan will look at item Editors to move App C to RDF Mapping spec to see if it is still relavant [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]

DaveO to work on text for LC5f - Closed as issue is closed

Sanjiva will write up this proposal

and email it to the list as a response

to the objection.

Discssion about what "this proposal" is - something about WS-Addressing action value.

Sanjiva: A way to tie the Action from WS-A and the operation name feature in WSLD 2.0

Jonathan: leave this action item open for now.

All the media type issues are DONE

<Marsh> ACTION: Marsh to troll minutes looking for more CR criteria. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action02]

Jonathan has created a CR exit criteria document

Arthur: how to things get added?

Jonathan: Edit the CVS file directly, or ask Jonanthan to add.

<jjm> ACTION: Part1 editors to replace import/include table w/ that from Asir [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action03]

Editors to merge parts 2 and 3 - Amy has some ideas on how to do this

Amy: Can a part 1 editor grab the style section from P1 and give it to a part 2/3 editor?

Arthur: I can do that.

Hogo: I will do the integration

Administrivia

Upcoming FTF: April 21-22, Mountain View (Microsoft)

Next meeting: May 30 (Monday) thruw noon Wed.

Location would be Berlin

SAP would be hosting

Primer

Jonathan: Did anyone send text for primer?

Kevin: there were a few other who sent text (arthur)

Arthur: this was for a previous action item

DBooth: the sooner the better

Arthur: Set a deadline?

DBooth: how about March 30?

All: OK with March 30.

jonathan: Issue LC89i: We need a primer. proposed to close.

RESOLUTION: close issue LC89i

Media Type Description issues

Discussion about closing various issues that have been addressed

Issue 269: "expectedContentTypes" - make it singular or plural.

Umit: if we can make someone happier, make the change

Tom: I think we should change it to plural

Jonathan: Any objection to adding the "s"? No

RESOLUTION: Change expectedContentType ==> expectedContentTypes

Jonanthan: Any objected to closing all the issues? No

RESOLUTION: to close Media type issues: 256, 257

RESOLUTION: to close Media type issues: 269, 275, 276, 277

RESOLUTION: closed accepted editorial issues: 253, 254, 255, 264, 265, 267, 274

<Arthur> latest version of primer is now available at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-primer.html

Jonathan: With these issues closed, we can move the process forward and prepare for final publications in a few weeks.

<scribe> ACTION: Jonathan to notify the XMLP, i18n and XML Schema groups that we are prepared to publish. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action04]

<scribe> ACTION: Anish and Umit will respond to comments on media type description documents with our actions. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action05]

<scribe> ACTION: Editors to check URI and schema references in Part 1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action06]

Last Call Issues

Jonathan: In-Multi-Out MEP was added a new issue

Feature & Property composition issues

Jonathan: propose to close issues LC20 and LC27.

Arthur: Yes, we are done with these.

Jonathan: Any objections? No.

RESOLUTION: Close issue LC20 and LC27.

<sanjiva> I'm +1 for not discussing the component model topic again ;-)

Component model necessary?

Jonathan: this was resolved at the F2F. We will keep the component model.

Z notation necessary?

Jonathan: We did this over the course of a year and carefully and slowly put it in to the spec. But now some are unhappy that it is there.

<bijan> +1

<bijan> er

Jonathan: Concerns are: spec interpretation, complexity, etc.

Bijan: Concerned that the Z should not be normative, the text should be the only normative.
... What happened with there is a conflict between text and Z?

Jonathan: We would have to issue and errata.

<dbooth> Both English and Z are normative, just as multiple English paragraphs are both normative. If there are conflicts then the spec is erroneous.

<sanjiva> Is our schema normative too?

<KevinL> +1 to Bijan.

Tomj: why don't we say the english takes priority?

Umit: We should move the Z to another document and make it non-normative.

Arthur: Can get others who know Z to review. The Z is more precise. It should never contradict the text.

Hugo: Maybe we should keep the Z, but move it out of part 1 & 2.

Arthur: The Z has found many bugs in the english text. It has been very useful.
... The Z is machine readable and it can keep the spec consistant. Moving it out of the spec would make it harder to keep it in sync.

Sanjiva: Would prefer with "sub-normative" proposal: english takes priorty. Would also like to move the Z to another document.

<KevinL> currently we actually have two versions of the spec, one with the Z-notation and is normative, the other one without (hiding) the Z-notation and is non-normative. How about we keep these two versions, but treat the version WITHOUT the z-notataion as normative?

Bijan: Very much likes the machine readibility.

<sanjiva> kevin: that's certainly a viable approach .. the normative spec doens't have it but we have an "augmented' version which provides z as an additional formalism.

Roberto: How did Z help correct english?

Arthur: Z and english were inconsistant

<alewis> eek!

Roberto: Was unable to run the type checker - didn't see the Z.

<bijan> addition for the scribe: While I love machine checkability, machine checking can only tell you if the formalization is consistent, not whether it is adequate to the domain. If we can get the group to agree that Arthur's formalization answers to the groups intentions as expressed in the spec.

Roberto: discussion about build process problems ...

<Zakim> dbooth2, you wanted to worry about the meaning of "if there is a conflict, then English wins"

<Zakim> dbooth, you wanted to ask Arthur about impact of moving Z to appendix

Dbooth: Can we move Z to an appendix?

Arthur: the hidden version should be enough...

DBooth: confused about how we would do the "english text wins".

<JacekK> +1 to DBooth

Sanjiva: how does the normitive schema work?

Kevin: Agrees with Arthur. The 2 versions should be good. We can treat the one without Z as normative.

<Zakim> alewis, you wanted to comment on conflicts and normativity

Tomj: Why are we talking about display issues again - Arthur solved this problem with the DHTML version of the spec
... I don't see the problem with the "english text wins". We just say that.

<dbooth> "Conflict" needs to be clearly defined. Suppose English forbids something that the Z permits. Which wins? Suppose the Z forbids something that the English permits. Which wins?

Amy: The Z is much more precise, the english leave much more room for interpratation. This is bad

<bijan> The problem with Z being more precise where there is an abmiguity is that arthur is the one who decided (roughly) what interpretation wins.

<bijan> If the group is ok with that, that's fine, of course

<alewis> tom, my point is not that "this is bad." the point is that an attempt to clarify by saying "the usually-more-ambiguous version trumps the usually-more-precise version" makes the extra precision of zed utterly pointless.

<dbooth> +1 to alewis

Arthur: Want to ship the Z, very useful.

<dbooth> chad option no: no

Jonathan: Proposal: strip the Z from the normative, leave Z in the informational version of the spec.

<Arthur> yes

Remove the Z from the normiative version of spec: Results of question: 13 yes, 4 no.

Jonathan: Any objections? No.

<sanjiva> I suggest we keep it as-is in the editor's copy version

<sanjiva> That forces people to read it .. rather than ignoring it

RESOLUTION: Remove the Z from the normiative version of spec.

<Marsh> ACTION: Editors (Arthur?) to hide the Z from the normative version. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action07]

Issue LC75u: Add wsdl:documentation to the component model

Jonathan: This sounds "mostly harmless". Send mail to the list as we will discuss next week.

Issue LC80: Extension Components are not Described

Arthur: Volunteers to write up a proposal to fix the fact that we don't have any extension components.

Sanjiva: Isn't this by design?

Jonathan: please take this issue to the list.

LC83: The Component Model Does Not Enforce Component Nesting

Arthur: This is probably closed because in F2F in Boston was added a parent component property.

Adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Anish and Umit will respond to comments on media type description documents with our actions. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Bijan will look at item Editors to move App C to RDF Mapping spec to see if it is still relavant [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Editors (Arthur?) to hide the Z from the normative version. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Editors to check URI and schema references in Part 1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Jonathan to notify the XMLP, i18n and XML Schema groups that we are prepared to publish. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Marsh to troll minutes looking for more CR criteria. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Part1 editors to replace import/include table w/ that from Asir [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/10-ws-desc-minutes.html#action03]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.115 (CVS log)
$Date: 2005/03/10 17:42:08 $