RE: Agenda, WS-RA 2009-03-03

Based on the minutes included in this link, which were just posted today:

we have the following comments and proposed changes to reflect more accurately the proceedings:

1) In "Review of PFWG" section, do we need to add comments about why the 3 companies opposed adding the additional comments suggested by Microsoft? The only comment currently in the minutes is the "no benefit to do so" comment from Doug.

2) In "Issues with proposals" section under Issue 6398, after text:

geoff: align with http, backward comp, ws-i bp compliance
options for compliant to bp: relax, use policy, or go to bp wg

We would like the following text added after this:

Geoff only described summary section of proposal.  It was decided that there was no need to go through the whole thing - "People can read" was one comment made.

3) Later in same section, there was a comment:

geoff: voting on it is too soon, need more time to discuss.

We would like that extended to:

geoff: voting on it is too soon, need more time to discuss.  My proposal was only submitted yesterday and there were new comments on the mailing list about it as little as 10 minutes before the start of this call.

4) Later in the same section, there was a comment:

bob: Will more discussion help the decision?

We would like this changed to:

bob: Will more discussion on Geoff's proposal help the decision?

We have enclosed a word doc of the minutes, highlighting our proposed changes, for your convenience.
Best Regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Bob Freund
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 5:22 AM
Subject: Agenda, WS-RA 2009-03-03

Topic: Opening
Selection of scribe, see scribe list[1]
Approval of this Agenda
Approval of Minutes from 2009-02-24 [2]

Topic: WG Admistrivia
-Reminder to develop an opinion by March 10 on adding a f2f at the W3C  
Tech Plenary 2-6 November in Santa Clara; Potential WG meeting 11/2,  
3, 5, and 6 (Must respond by March 18)

Topic: FPWD SoTD comments, Publication Status
-Is WG ok with proposal in 

Topic: Action item review

Topic: Acceptance of New Issues
-Issue-6632 RT - Define fault for cases where the GetResult is too  
large -Bullen
-Issue-6633 RT - Namespaces in updates 
-Issue-6634 RT - Document algorithm for modify 
-Issue-6635 RT - Outer resource with individually addressable inner  
resources -Bullen
-Issue-6636 RT - Add example of resource after the create 
-Issue-6639 MEX: make actionURIs consistent 
-Issue-6641 RA: How to get the XSD 
-Issue-6642 WS-Eventing does not describe how to advertise policy for  
Subscription Manager 
id=6642 -Pilz

Topic: Issues with proposals
-Issue-6587 RA: Consistent text for 'Notational Conventions' 
-Issue-6424 Eventing-Adopting XML Infoset Representation in WS- 
Eventing -Li
-Issue-6392 Transfer- GetResponse violates WS-I BP 
-Issue-6396 Transfer-CreateResponse violates WS-I BP 
-Issue-6588 Transfer: Changes uses of soap: transport to http:  
transport -Davis

-Issue-6400 Eventing-SubscriptionEnd violates WS-I BP 
-Issue-6425 Eventing-Clarify How to Address Event Source 
-Issue-6428 Eventing: Separate Event Delivery Mode and Format 
-Issue-6429 Eventing: Standardize Wrapped Event Sink 
-Issue-6430 Eventing-Remove Attribute wse:EventSource 
-Issue-6431 Eventing-Add Pause/Resume Subscription 
-Issue-6498 Eventing: Define fault action URI 

-Issue-6399 Enumeration-EnumerationEnd violate WS-I BP
-Issue-6403 Enumeration - define policy

-Issue-6413 Transfer- merge RT in T 
-Issue-6594 Transfer: Add extensibility points for WS-Transfer  
wrappers -Davis

-Issue-6404 MEX- define the MEX dialect 
-Issue-6418 MEX - When requesting metadata, what should provider  
return? -Bullen
-Issue-6463 MEX-Attaching Policy to WS-Mex GetMetadata 
-Issue-6604 MEX: Define a way to ask for more than one MEX dialect 

Needing Proposals and Discussion: (list is only partially complete)
-Issue-6401 WS-Eventing Notifications violates WS-I BP 
-Issue-6402 WS-Eventing - define policy 
-Issue-6421 Eventing-Extension point in reply message of Unsubscribe 
-Issue-6432 WS-Eventing Push delivery mode does not work when the  
subscriber is not addressable 
-Issue-6435 WS-Eventing needs state table to fully describe protocol 
-Issue-6436 WS-Enumeration needs state table to fully describe  
protocol -Pilz
-Issue-6406 WS-MEX - define policy 
-Issue-6411 WS-MEX: no way to create metadata 
-Issue-6407 WS-RT - define policy 
-Issue-6422 RT - Introduces An Ad Hoc Boxcarring Mechanism 



Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2009 16:34:59 UTC