RE: Minutes for the 2005-02-14 teleconference

>-----Original Message-----
>Sent: Monday, Feb 14, 2005 15:32 PM
>Subject: Minutes for the 2005-02-14 teleconference
>... are available for review at:
>as well as attached.
>Thanks to Mark Peel for scribing.

After reading the minutes, I realized that Marc and I talked past each
other and I could not express what I was getting at correctly about
Issue048. Since some of what I have said seem to be missing as well, a
correction is in order. 

What I was trying to say was that Reference Parameters may be used to
distinguish EPRs, NOT Endpoints. Apologies for not noticing this in the
IRC and correcting it at the call. Issue048 is about comparison of EPRs,
NOT about Endpoints. There is a very important distinction here, as
there are three different notions we are dealing with, EPRs, Endpoint
and Endpoint Components in WSDL. The terms are used interchangeably and
it causes confusion. IMO, most of my problems with the EPR comparison
section is about this interchangeable use of language. 

I also indicated in the call that we have just made a decision about
Issue020 Subissue iv (note that the statement in the minutes should read
"Issue 20 subissue iv closed with Tony's amendment" instead of "Issue 20
subissue vi closed with Tony's amendment") which clarified the
differences between EPR, Endpoint, Endpoint Component. Since there can
be many EPRs that may be used to address a specific endpoint which may
in fact have multiple descriptions, I was trying to indicate that when
comparing two EPRs Reference Parameters may be significant. This does
not mean that the endpoints that two EPRs are referring to are
different. Hence, I don't believe we have an issue here about identity,

I will make rest of my points in the appropriate thread for Issue048 why
the section is broken. This note is just to correct the minutes.

Received on Thursday, 17 February 2005 23:02:08 UTC