See also: IRC log
Minutes are approved
Review of Action items [.1]. [Interop] DONE 2006-11-30: [interop] John Kaputin to create a test case with "required=false". DONE 2006-12-14: [interop] Jonathan to fix transferCodings - add control group [WG] ? 2006-09-21: Jonathan to check periodically that SPARQL has added schemaLocation. DONE [.6] 2006-12-14: plh to come up with a more detailed proposal for CR112 if possible ? 2007-01-04: Paul to report back on which test cases in the WSDL test suite fail the basic patterns, with suggestions on how to address the issues. ? 2007-01-11: Jean-Jacques to provide more analysis on how difficult it would be deal with a Policy that only contains an MTOM policy assertion DONE [.3] 2007-02-08: Jonathan to forward comments on one-way mep to XMLP working group. DONE [.4] 2007-02-08: Jacek to approach TAG on subject of moving "safety" annotation from WSDL specification to SAWSDL. DONE [.5] 2007-02-08: Jacek to investigate soap and http with respect to soap action header. Current Editorial Action Items 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 [.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2007Feb/0000.html [.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Feb/0066.html [.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Feb/0051.html [.6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Feb/0100.html
<alewis> +1 to jonathan's proposed comment.
<charltonb> +1 to jonathan
<scribe> ACTION: Jonathan to forward his WSDL1.1 identifiers comments [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/15-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]
<Jonathan> ACTION: Jonathan to drum up a WS-A reviewer off-list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/15-ws-desc-minutes.html#action02]
CR109: go with option a
Jonathan: I enumerated 6 mapping
options (a to f)
... a and d were discussed and accepted. Remains the case of SOAP-Response
... mixed with robust-inonly and inonly
youn: I am not sure there is a use case now for SOAP response with inonly and robust inonly.
Jonathan: we should refer to SOAP1.2 Second Edition
Jonathan: I will foward this to arthur
Problem of section reference
<charltonb> +1 to JJM
Jonathan: answered by mail
Jonathan: we can no longer describe transfer coding header at the WSDL level but an impl can still set it as it wants
Phillipe: summarizes the
... I propose to add a new section to HTTP binding to combine the location and address properties to compute the request IRI
... The remainder of the proposal is to align with this
Discussion about the last part of the proposal: address values that contain a ?
with 112 according philippe proposal and add a
... , note about http url that should not contain ? or #
No answers from TAG
... by removing the last trailing slash
Consensus from XMLP that you should not put a content type on a GET request.
then no soap action can be set for SOAP Get requests
RESOLUTION: Close 148 by adding a note to 5.10.3 telling that setting action has no effect when soap response is in use no action
<scribe> ACTION: Jonathan to check whether the test suite needs to be fixed with regards to SOAP Response and action [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/15-ws-desc-minutes.html#action03]
<inserted> RESOLUTION: Remove fixed-width type from "input".
RESOLUTION: Close with no action*
RESOLUTION: Close CR152 with no action
<Zakim> JacekK, you wanted to say we should stick