See also: IRC log
<TonyR> next week it will be 5pm to 2am
<scribe> Scribe: Roberto
Marsh: minutes approved
?* 2004-11-11: Anish to propose additions to the test suite for the purpose of interoperability testing, due 2005-05-12. ? 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. ? 2005-04-21: Pauld to craft, publish Common Schema structures to WG for review for publication as WG Note, due 2005-05-28. DONE [.4] 2005-04-21: Hugo to continue to look at IRI style/URI style, due 2005-05-26. (LC74a) ?* 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 2005-05-19. (LC61c) DONE [.3] 2005-04-22: Amy to investigate a solution, due 2005-05-19 (LC74c) ?* 2005-05-05: Sanjiva to writeup a proposal for LC71, due 2005-05-26. DUE 06-01 2005-05-12: Glen to add scoping example to primer, due 2005-06-01. ? 2005-05-19: Umit to provide #none for Primer, due 2005-06-01. ? 2005-05-19: DaveO to ressurect option to indicate GET more directly, due 2005-06-01. Outstanding editorial work: ? 2005-04-28: Arthur to introduce specialized markup for components and properties. DONE [.5] 2005-05-12: Primer editors to remove section 7.1.2 - we don't define scoping rules for extension elements. [.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/2005May/0068.html [.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005May/0077.html [.5] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-primer.ht ml#adv-extensibility
Marsh: haven't heard yet from the
... hopes to look at the common schema structures note after the last call issues are completed
... f2f agenda to be sent out tomorrow
... send any proposals/issues not yet recorded on the issues list
... glen wrote up a compromise proposal for compositors
... there is another formal objection to the operation mapping
... will follow up with all the objectors
... alternative schema languages note now linked from the WG page
... also editorial action to remove appendix E
bijan: there were some issues on alternate schema languages, should we highlight them in the note?
arthur: need to get rid of gray
areas, so we need to say where the necessary rules belong -- is
it the extension specs?
... in this case, specs for type system extensions
bijan: problem is worse for non-XML type systems
Marsh: should start collecting issues around the note
bijan: jacek wanted to write up
how to use the RDF/OWL type system
... extension specs in the note are incomplete if they don't address these issues
Marsh: still need to resolve zed/mathml, will do it at the f2f
Marsh: two new issues are
... need to fix notation problem
... discrepancies between schema and spec
... any objections to making .4 and .5 editorial?
Marsh: jacek had an issue (.3) on
binding fault defaulting
... http:code is optional but wsoap:code isn't; why?
... this is a design issue
tomj: doesn't like binding is not defaultable anymore
Marsh: will add issue to the f2f
... solicits concrete proposals to solve the issue
Marsh: editorial changes approved with no objections (LC97, LC126, LC129)
Marsh: after LC97, we don't talk
about properties having defaults anymore
... proposes to close it as subsumed by LC97
tomj: isn't then safe="false" the default?
Arthur: attribute cannot be set to a non-boolean value
tomj: 126.96.36.199 says that the the AII doesn't have a default value
<uyalcina> rather late, but I verified LC 126 and LC126. They are resolved.
<Marsh> ACTION: Arthur to add "safe" attribute to the schema, and fix the other schema issues noted in the new issue. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/26-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]
Marsh: any objections to closing LC75j?
RESOLUTION: LC75j closed as subsumed by LC97
<uyalcina> I meant LC 126 + 129
Marsh: issue talks about
partitioning elements into multiple namespaces
... any champions for this issue?
tomj: proposes to close it
Marsh: proposal is to have a different namespace for each symbol space (maybe?)
Arthur: within a namespace, you
can pick your names
... some names are resolved only within a given context
... is the proposal to make all of them QNames?
tomj: the spec does contain a lot of those notes
Roberto: would understand the proposal better if it suggested using URIs
Arthur: inheritance is also a source of clashes
umit: wants to close, but feels we don't quite understand what the issue says
Marsh: anyone wants to write up a rationale for closing it?
<Marsh> ACTION: Marsh to ask Rich about the worst example for LC89j [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/26-ws-desc-minutes.html#action02]
Hugo: describes his
... first IRI is built from data, then IRI is mapped to URI via %-encoding (RFC 3987)
... checked with W3C i18n folks and they're ok with it
Marsh: already changed URI to IRI in most places (where appropriate)
tomj: there are no IRIs in part 1
Marsh: resolution was on april 21st at the MV f2f
RESOLUTION: Hugo's proposal for LC74a approved
Marsh: LC74a is now closed
Marsh: Hugo was going to add component designators for the soap and http extensions
Hugo: will complete the action based on mail 2005May/0057.html
Marsh: i18n asked for making documentation i18n-able
Amy: proposes to make
wsdl:documentation attribute extensible and *-cardinality
... no need to define special meaning for multiple doc items
Arthur: isn't it already enabled?
we don't constrain the contents of documentation
... you can have multiple paragraph elements inside documentation
... what language code should I use for machine processable documentation?
Marsh: xml:lang="" turns off any assertions
umit: supports the proposal
Arthur: XML schema separates
documentation from appinfo
... while we support them both with documentation
umit: this is a different issue than LC74c
Roberto: would like to talk about it more at the f2f
Marsh: will add it to the agenda
Marsh: proposal is to add an extension attribute to point to schema processing rules
pauld: (explains the proposal)
Marsh: calls for alternate proposals
Arthur: if this is a predefined extension, there should be one concrete processing style we can point to
Sanjiva: will people implement the processing style for that value?
Marsh: we need more detail from Paul for next week's discussion
<Marsh> ACTION: Paul to describe LC124 proposal in more detail (where does the attribute go, what's the value for normal Schema validation?) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/26-ws-desc-minutes.html#action03]
DaveO: the schema WG is defining profiles
Marsh: we won't hear from the WSA WG before the f2f
<pauld> ACTION: pauld to provide a more concrete proposal for LC124 for the F2F [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/26-ws-desc-minutes.html#action04]
<TonyR> s/won't here/won't hear/
Umit: asks people to look at the primer examples to understand the proposal
Marsh: calls for a volunteer
glend: it's connected with the
... will describe the options being discussed in the async tf
umit: already wrote it up, will forward
Marsh: calls for a volunteer to write a concrete proposal
<Marsh> ACTION: Glen to put an LC101 proposal on the table. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/26-ws-desc-minutes.html#action05]
<Marsh> ACTION: Tom to provide a concrete proposal to address LC82 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/26-ws-desc-minutes.html#action06]
Marsh: LC84b on the agenda for
... LC84c needs a volunteer
arthur: who wrote the OMR?
<Marsh> ACTION: Marsh to ask DBooth if the concerns in LC84c are still valid. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/26-ws-desc-minutes.html#action07]
<Tomj> No one seems to understand the issue fully, can we ask David booth?