WS Description WG telcon

<Jonathan> Scribe: Youenn

Minutes

<Jonathan> Approved

--------------------------------------------------------------------
3.  Review of Action items [.1]. 

[Interop]
?         2006-07-06: [interop] Jonathan - create validation-report
                      stylesheet.
DONE      2006-07-07: [interop] John to write spec text for transfer
                      coding 
?         2006-07-20: [interop] Jonathan to add timestamps to result
                      stylesheet.

WG
?         2005-07-21: Pauld to write a proposal for a working group 
                      report for requirements for schema evolution 
                      following closure of LC124 
?         2006-03-30: Marsh to make XSLT improvements for RDF
                      publication. 
?         2006-06-29: Philippe to write up recommended text to clarify 
                      the issue in CR53.
?         2006-07-06: Glen to contribute some extension test cases.
DONE      2006-07-06: John to write proposal for CR055 based on 
                      discussion and Jacek's email.
?         2006-07-13: Roberto to produce an updated proposal for CR044.
?         2006-07-20: Arthur to update "Proposed Part 1 Text for 
                      REQUIRED Extension Properties".

Current Editorial Action Items
 - none -

Note: Editorial AIs associated with LC issues recorded at [.2]. 

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/#actions
[.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/actions_owner.html

Future telcons

<jjm> 14 Sep: Features at risk

<jjm> Refresh our CR in Septembre (not back to CR again)

<jjm> 28 Sep: RDF mapping issues

<jjm> Get that document out of CR

<jjm> Scribe: jjm

Marsh: features at risk: F&P, unused MEPs, etc.

CR44

No news from Roberto. Still officially closed. Will reopen only if Roberto provides new information.

CR55

<Jonathan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Sep/0008.html

Marsh: John Kaputin provided a proposal
... then discussion with JJM

JJM: after discussion, he proposed to move the text to a separate "Selection" section
... which seems good to me

<Jonathan> Proposal is:

Tony: what about "empty" or "none"?

JJM: I raised the issue but don't know the answer

<Jonathan> 1) Message 0008 + "Otherwise none" after each bullet list.

Tony: none seems sensible

<Jonathan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Sep/0004.html

<Jonathan> 2) Message 0004 - "If this property is not present ..." on last two bullets.

JJM: read "-" above as minus

<scribe> Closed with above resolution

CR22

Wait until Arthur and Roberto are back

CR53

Wait for Philippe to complete his AI

CR69

MEPs out of other MEPs

Marsh: Theoretical

Close with no action

CR52

<youenn> Issue 54

Marsh: wrote back to the commentator 2 months to indicate we're into CR and cannot handle this issue, no response since

Close with no action

CR54

Philippe: similar, no response from commentator

Close with no action

CR45

Skip, action has not been done

CR59

Marsh: Add that this attribute is on the Binding Operation. Editorial in nature

Implement above resolution

CR61

Approve suggested editorial fix

CR62

Philippe: Feature example, so maybe skip until we decide about F&P

Skip

CR63

Marsh: should be fairly obvious we're not changing the way namespaces work

Tony: s/cut and paste/conceptually/ ?

Marsh: sounds good
... +s/embedding/

<plh> Tony: s/simply //conceptually cutting and pasting

Marsh: 1) close with no action; 2) replace simply w/ conceptually; 3) s/c&p/embedding/

Tony: don't like 3, people already know c&p

Marsh: 4) s/^/Conceptually/

Resolution: Implement option 4

CR66

<youenn> plh: why having the first sentence in 2.15.1 ?

<Jonathan> test?

<youenn> Marsh: an endpoint component is never refered from the WSDL.

<youenn> plh: then we can remove the sentence.

<youenn> RESOLUTION: Close this issue by removing the sentence in 2.15.1

<Jonathan> Remove "they cannot be referred to by QName"

<plh> Endpoint components are local to a given Service component (see A.2 Fragment Identifiers).

CR68

<youenn> Marsh: editorial issue

<youenn> Marsh: two issues there

<youenn> Marsh: no objection to fix the specification according the recommendations

<youenn> Resolution: Accept the proposal to clarify 2.2.1, 2.2.2 and 2.2.3

CR77

<youenn> Marsh: propose to close this issue by adding a slash to the soap1.1 binding http uri and do a consistency check in the primer and test-suite to have soap 1.2/1.1 binding http uris with the slash

<youenn> No objection

CR78

<youenn> Marsh: this is a request to constraint the message element type and the message element xsi:type if any, especially in the case of very general schema elements

<youenn> Marsh: this use case does not seem to appeal to many people

<Jonathan> ACTION: Marsh to propose workarounds for CR78. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/09/07-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]