W3C

WSDL WG Teleconference

5 May 2005

See also: IRC log

Attendees

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

Contents


<scribe> Scribe: Asir S Vedamuthu

<scribe> ScribeNick: asir

Approval of minutes

RESOLUTION: Approved http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/att-0168/20050428-ws-desc-minutes.html
... Approved F2F Minutes

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/att-0162/20050421-ws-desc-minutes.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/att-0162/20050422-ws-desc-minutes.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0162.html

Review of Action items

DUE 5-12   2004-11-11: Anish to propose additions to the test suite for 
                      the purpose of interoperability testing, 
                      due 2005-04-13.
PENDING  2004-12-03: Glen and Asir to help craft the specfic text for
                      the editors (LC18), due 2005-04-13.
PENDING   2005-03-31: Marsh to take on (or recommend closing) Bijan's AI
                      to produce a component/property table via XSLT, 
                      due 2005-05-28.
DONE[.14] 2005-04-21: Arthur to review primer sec 4.1 for correctness,
                      due 2005-05-05. 
DONE      2005-04-21: Kevin to add inheritance example to primer sec 5,
                      due 2005-05-05. 
DONE      2005-04-21: Kevin to do outbound interface example in primer, 
                      due 2005-05-05. 
DONE      2005-04-21: Hugo to check (Section 6.6) for correctness, 
                      due ?. 
DUE 5-12  2005-04-21: GlenD to check scoping (Section 7.2) references,
                      due ?. 
DONE[.13] 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 ? 
DONE[.13] 2005-04-21: Hugo to establish RDDL docs, due ?. 
PENDING   2005-04-21: Pauld to craft, publish Common Schema structures
                      to WG for review for publication as WG Note, 
                      due 2005-05-28. 
DONE[.13] 2005-04-21: Hugo to take action to check with Henry if accept
                      our resolution, due ?. 
PENDING   2005-04-21: Hugo to continue to look at IRI style/URI style,
                      due 2005-05-26. (LC74a)
DONE [.8] 2005-04-21: Asir to provide modified text of section 4.2 to
                      editors, due 2005-05-06 (LC120) 
DONE [.4] 2005-04-21: Tom to provide additional text to section 7, 
                      part 1, wsdlLocation, due 2005-05-02. (LC59d) 
DONE [.5] 2005-04-22: Jonathan to ask WS-Addressing to ensure that they 
                      clearly specify overriding of the fault 
                      destination, due ?2005-05-02. (LC76a) 
DONE      2005-04-22: Glen to send a response for LC89e, due ?. 
DONE      2005-04-22: Amy to define propogation, due ?. (LC76b) 
?         2005-04-22: Umit to write an alternate proposal, 
                      due 2005-05-12 (LC117)
DUE 5-12  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) 
?         2005-04-22: Arthur to investigate the Schema Designators and 
                      come back with a proposal, due 2005-05-12. (LC64) 
DUE 5-12  2005-04-22: Amy to investigate a solution, due ? (LC74c)
DONE [.6] 2005-04-28: Marsh to add link to primer to-do list from WG 
                      page, due 2005-04-28. 
DONE[.12] 2005-04-28: Charlton and Jacek to review WS-A, due 
                      2005-05-04.
DONE [.9] 2005-04-28: Jonathan will draft a proposal on how to use an 
                      EPR as a WSDL extension, due 2005-05-12.

Outstanding editorial work:
DONE [.3] 2004-10-14: Roberto 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?) 
REASSIGN [.10] 2004-11-10: Arthur remove ambiguity if it exists 
DONE      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 
DONE[.11] 2005-01-19: Part 1 Editors to rewrite ONMR as Best practice. 
DONE [.7] 2005-04-22: Arthur 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) 
DONE [.3] 2005-04-21: Roberto Fix the "processor" language in 4.1.1, 
                      (LC75w)
DONE [.7] 2005-04-21: Arthur to make sure that inline/embedded schema 
                      used consistently and defined. (LC116) 
PENDING   2005-04-21: Part 2 editors to define frag id extensions for 
                      soap:header, http:header, soap:module. (LC80)
PENDING   2005-04-28: Editors to introduce specialized markup for 
                      components and properties.

[.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/Member/w3c-archive/2005Apr/0146.html
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0169.html
[.5]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Apr/0068.ht
ml
[.6] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/
[.7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2005May/0000.html
[.8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2005Apr/0042.html
[.9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005May/0000.html
[.10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2005May/0009.html
[.11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2005May/0008.html
[.12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005May/0003.html
[.13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005May/0010.html
[.14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2005May/0019.html

Administrivia

Marsh: we have a new member today, Sanjiva !!

<sanjiva> Nice to meet everyone ;-)

Next F2F discussion, May 31 - June 1 Berlin

http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34041/wsdf2fberlin5/

<sanjiva> Jonathan: I just committed the text from Tom Jordahl for wsdlLocation

Marsh: async TF issues will be scheduled for the F2F
... other major issue is schema wg issue, LC90
... and, then onto second last call

Publication status report

Media Type Description Note published, http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-xml-media-types-20050502/

Marsh: thanks to everyone

Ready to be published - Core, Adjuncts, Primer, and SOAP 1.1 Binding Note

Time, Tuesday next week

Marsh: Arthur reported some inconsistencies in the primer
... beneficial to publish now

kevin: add editorial notes and publish

Marsh: lets go as is

kevin: agrees, describes a few typos .. will hold them for later

Primer review and issue tracking process

Marsh: Arthur and JJ reported issues, happy to not track them, suggests Kevin track it

Kevin: agrees, easier for him to track

Last Call Review: WS-Addressing

http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-core-20050331/

http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-soap-20050331/

Jacek, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005May/0003.html

[going back to review of action items, specially for glen :-)]

[JaceKK walks thru ws-addressing issues]

First: when reply is expected, replyTo is mandatory .. tho the same communication channel is used; replyTo is mostly unnecesary; ask ws-addressing wg to make it optional

[several: been there, done that, got shot down]

sanjiva: whats it to do with WSDL?

JaceKK: WSDL doesn't give a normative use for replyTo

Marsh: we have developed MEPs, none of them use replyTo

JaceKK: we have two bindings, they only use two MEPs and never require replyTo

sanjiva: not related to WSDL at all .. if the user points out a different address, then they are allowed to use it

DaveO: supports JacekK's position .. the pattern of anonymous reply is a very important comment for the WSDL WG to make it

Marsh: when you are using our req-response, you are forced to put replyTo header, but it doesn't provide any value

Umit: points out that this issue is premature, because WSDL 20 binding is yet to be published

glen: am happy to send this comment

Roberto: we should send the comment and not wait for the TF

Marsh: suggests a poll

<hugo> Jacek, have you seen http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Mar/0141.html (background on this issue)?

Marsh: allow the replyTo header to be anonymous URI

Sanjiva: not going to object to it, but this comment is not germane to WSDL

Hugo: agrees

Umit: agrees

Amy: this is an accurate comment, in favor of sending it

<hugo> (saying that, I *wanted* to have ReplyTo optional, but lost in the Addr WG; I'm not expecting this to change at this point, as there's no new info IMO)

<uyalcina> +1

[straw poll]

Marsh: proposal - we like to see replyTo default to anonymous URI

<JacekK> the new info is the relative weight of another group's opinion about this, not technical new info, but more like implementors' "hard to implement" or "unnecessary code", it doesn't break anything except the Occam's razor 8-)

<scribe> ACTION: GlenD to write - to see replyTo default to anonymous URI - comment to WS-Addressing WG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]

<Marsh> ACTION: Send a note to WS-A that more comments will come [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action02]

JaceKK [ONMR related issue]

JaceKK: we decided that operations do not have semantics, ws-addressing implies that operations carry semantics .. tho DaveO's proposal (compatibleWith) did imply some semantics
... WS-addressing action is not formulated as an extension that satisfies ONMR best practice

Marsh: what falls into core, wsdl, ..

JaceKK: core recommends this tie .. I would like the action to be optional

Sanjiva: we shouldn't make this comment

Hugo: agrees

Umit: agrees

Hugo: we will discuss another related issue later on (LC84b, right?

Jacekk: in most cases, body will identify the operation and action info is redundant

<glenD> Note that action is NOT, I believe, in any way constrained to have anything to do with operation as far as WS-Addressing (or SOAP) is concerned.

<glenD> Thus I'm not sure it does in general satisfy the ONM best practice - just CAN be used that way

<glenD> (and there's no standard indication in WSDL that it *is* being used that way, btw!)

[discussion about action, ONMR, best practice, ..]

<charlton> Jonathan, Hugo, Asir - I'll touch base with each of you after 10.30-11.00 PST

Marsh: not hearing any support for this comment, anyone?

Jacekk: agrees to move on

Marsh: do yo have major/minor comments?

Charlton: minor and writing them out as we speak

Marsh: will schedule them for next week

New Last Call Issues

Clarification for wsdl:required attribute needed (Umit) - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0171.html

<anish> +1 to umit's interpretation

Umit: but, the text is not clear about it

Marsh: to make it editorial

What are sections 2.16.x for? (Jonathan) - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005May/0007.html

Marsh: JJ already fixed this one

Comment: wsdl:include (Asir) - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005May/0021.html

Marsh: any objections to assinging these to editors?

Editors have resolved many editorial issues

LC74g, LC75b, LC78, LC87, LC89g, LC93, LC95, LC107, LC112, LC115, LC119, LC123, LC125

Proposal to close these editorial issues

RESOLUTION: Close these editorial issues: LC74g, LC75b, LC78, LC87, LC89g, LC93, LC95, LC107, LC112, LC115, LC119, LC123, LC125

<scribe> ACTION: Asir to enumerate what is pending for LC97 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action03]

Issue LC59d: Clarify wsdlLocation

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC59d

Tom's proposal, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Apr/0169.html

Marsh: any discussion?
... any objections to close LC59d using Tom's text?

RESOLUTION: LC59d is closed

<sanjiva> FYI the text for 59d has already been put into the document

Issue LC75o: Remove "if any" from Table 2-13

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC75o

About the service section, http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#Service_details

Marsh: proposal to drop 'if any'

Sanjiva: +1

Asir: +1

Pauld: there are cases where there aren't endpoints but extensions will offer similar info

Marsh: any objections to removing 'if any'?

[clarifications ...]

RESOLUTION: close issue LC75o by removing 'if any' from LC Draft Table 2-13

Issue LC75c: Remove {safety} property

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC75c

Jonathan summarizes the poll #s from F2F

* chad 1| 4.0| 5.0| 6.0| 0.0| 0.0 [1st round pretty evenly split]

* chad 2| | 5.0| 9.0| 1.0| 1.0 [2nd round pretty decisive]

Marsh: calls for objections to option 2. That is, move it to an extension (part 2)

Hugo: is worried how this is going to work

[sliding into design ...]

<scribe> ACTION: Umit to writeup a simple proposal to make {safety} as an extension (deadline - 2 weeks) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action04]

Issue LC71: default interface/operation/@pattern

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC71

Marsh: any new info on LC71, how do we move this forward?

Sanjiva: this is something obvious, no proposal needed

amy: there isn't a good way to compute the distinction

Sanjiva: for the meps that we provide bindings, we can setup default values

really, really, really, amy: really

Sanjiva: not going to push for it

<sanjiva> yayyyyyyy!!!!!

<sanjiva> "its *really* a pain in the butt to put in the pattern all the time"

DaveO: looking up while I was working on async issues, I like to see a default mechanism, this will really help

<alewis> i think we'd be really close to raising an objection to this, if it happens.

DaveO: pick a few MEPs

[discussion about fault, fault references, higher level faults, any fault that you like to ...]

DaveO: am in agreement with Sanjiva

<scribe> ACTION: Sanjiva to writeup a proposal for LC71 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action05]

[Meeting adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Asir to enumerate what is pending for LC97 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: GlenD to write - to see replyTo default to anonymous URI - comment to WS-Addressing WG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Sanjiva to writeup a proposal for LC71 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Send a note to WS-A that more comments will come [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Umit to writeup a simple proposal to make {safety} as an extension (deadline - 2 weeks) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-ws-desc-minutes.html#action04]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.122 (CVS log)
$Date: 2005/05/05 16:35:02 $