W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2002

Web Services Description Working Group 2002-02-07 meeting minutes

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 09:38:07 -0800
Message-ID: <330564469BFEC046B84E591EB3D4D59C05120C24@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Web Services Description Working Group 2002-02-07 meeting minutes

Full minutes: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/02/07-minutes (members only)


Participants (30):
- Alan Kotok 
- Daniel Schutzer 
- David Booth 
- Don Wright 
- Glen Daniels 
- Igor Sedukhin 
- Jacek Kopecky 
- Jean-Jacques Moreau 
- Jeffrey Schlimmer 
- Jerry Thrasher 
- Jochen Ruetschlin 
- Jonathan Marsh 
- Keith Ballinger 
- Kevin Canyang Liu 
- Krishna Sankar 
- Mario Jeckle 
- Martin Gudgin 
- Mike Davoren 
- Mike McHugh 
- Pallavi Malu 
- Philippe Le Hégaret 
- Prasad Yendluri 
- Rich Salz 
- Roberto Chinnici 
- Sandeep Kumar 
- Sanjiva Weerawarana 
- Tom Jordahl 
- Waqar Sadiq 
- William Vambenepe 
- Youenn Fablet 

- Dale Moberg 

- Aaron Skonnard 
- Dave Solo 
- Mike Ballantyne 
- Sandra Swearingen 
- Tim Finin 

- Abinarayana Sakala, IONA 
- David Cleary, Progress Software 
- Jeff Mischkinsky, Oracle 

Review of outstanding action items
  No action item from previous meeting.

Agenda items
Minutes process for future

There is a minutes template. Philippe has volunteered to take minutes for this meeting. He also suggested that we take turns, by maintaining a list, initially in alphabetical order, and choosing a minute taker at the start of each telcon from the top of the list. After taking minutes, your name is moved to the bottom of the list. This sounds good to me, unless someone wants to volunteer more regularly. Other groups have reported success with using IRC for minutes, I'm happy to try this out in this group too. 

No objection to adopt this process

Jonathan: everybody should be subscribed on the mailing lists. some confusion already between administrative and public mailing list regarding introduction messages. telephone number, bridge, and irc information must only on the private list.

DavidB: agenda should go to the public list, not irc or phone numbers.
Philippe: XMLP send the minutes to the WG for review for one week, then publish them if approved. they removed members confidential content from them. might end up by having two pages with minutes (one private, one public).

Jonathan: this might take lots of the time of the WG...

Jean-Jacques: XML Protocol maintains 2 versions, one public, one member. we don't spend lots of time to remove member information.

Jonathan: full agenda, full minutes to w3c-ws-desc@w3.org. minutes (filtered by the Chair) will go on the public mailing list www-ws-desc@w3.org 

Member data survey
a. Time zone survey. What time zones do WG members reside in? This will help us decide whether to look for a different time slot.

b. WG cross-membership survey. What other WGs do members participate in? This will help us avoid scheduling conflicts, and give us a feeling on whether we should co-locate meetings with another group (WS Architecture? XML Protocol?). 

c. RDF fluency. One of our deliverables is an RDF mapping. What level of expertise do WG members have in this area? 

Jonathan: in which time zone and groups are you? How familiar are you with RDF?

Alan: GMT-5 (EST). limited experience with RDF.
Daniel: GMT-5 (EST). no RDF.
David: GMT-5 (EST). no RDF.
Don: GMT-5 (EST). no RDF.
Glen: GMT-5 (EST), [...],  Arch, XMLP, limited experience with RDF.
Igor: GMT-5 (EST), Arch, limited experience in RDF.
Jacek: GMT+1 (CET), XMLP, no RDF.
Jean-Jacques: GMT+1 (CET), XMLP, limited RDF.
Jeffrey: GMT-8 (PST), no RDF.
Jerry: GMT-5 (EST), no RDF.
Jochen: GMT+1 (CET), no RDF.
Jonathan: GMT-8 (PST), Core, Linking, XSL.
Keith: GMT-8 (PST), no RDF.
Kevin: GMT-8 (PST), no RDF.
Martin: GMT, XML Schema, XMLP, RDF experience.
MikeD: GMT-6 (CST), no RDF.
MikeM: GMT-6 (CST)
Pallavi: GMT-7 (MST), no RDF.
Philippe: GMT-5 (EST), DOM, limited experience with RDF.
Prasad: GMT-8 (PST), Arch, limited experience RDF.
Rich: GMT-5 (EST), XKMS, XMLP, no RDF.
Roberto: GMT-8 (PST), no RDF.
Sandeep: GMT-8 (PST), Arch, limited experience RDF.
Sanjiva: GMT+6 (ZP6), no RDF.
Tom: GMT-5 (EST), Arch, no RDF.
Waqar: GMT-6 (CST), Arch, no RDF.
William: GMT-8 (PST), no RDF.
Youenn: GMT+1, (CET) no RDF.
Krishna: GMT-8 (PST), Arch, limited experience with RDF but willing to
Abinarayana: GMT-8 (PST), no RDF.
Jeff: GMT-8 (PST), Arch, limited RDF.
DaveC: GMT-5 (EST), XML Schema, XForms.
Jonathan: So, we go from GMT-8 to GMT+6, with GMT+1 participants. 8:00AM GMT-8 (PST) seems ok. we can move to another day: friday?

Martin: schema meets twice a week, Thursday and Friday. Although the Friday schema call doesn't *always* happen. It's a backup slot, but we are using it at the moment

Jonathan: Monday?

[some oppositions, including the Chair]

Jonathan: here are the choices: Thursday, Friday. pick one.

Alan: <>
Daniel: <>
DavidB: <>
Don: friday
Glen: thursday
Igor: thursday
Jacek: <>
Jean-Jacques: thursday (conflict on friday)
Jeffrey: <>
Jerry: friday, conflict on thursday.
Jochen: thursday [Jochen left the call]
Keith: <>
Kevin: friday
Krishna: thursday
Mario: thursday
Martin: neither thursday or friday. (XML schema conflict)
MikeD: friday
MikeM: <>
Pallavi: friday (conflict on thursday)
Philippe: <>
Prasad: <>
Roberto: thursday
Sandeep: thursday
Sanjiva: thursday (conflict on friday)
Tom: hursday
Waqar: thursday
William: <>
Youenn: thursday (conflict on friday)
Abinarayana: thursday
Jeff: thursday
DaveC: friday (XML schema conflict)
Jonathan: looks like thursday is winning: ~4 people cannot on friday, ~3 on thursday

Jonathan: let's keep it on thursday for the moment.

Kevin: some people might not be there today because of conflict.

Resolution: Thursday for the moment, 11:00AM GMT-5 (EST). we might reconsider this decision in a few weeks.

FTF host

We would like to hold a FTF as early as possible, but we need to supply 8 week advance notice. That puts us into early April. I'll suggest April 11-12th (Thursday/Friday) as a possibility. We need a volunteer to host this meeting.

Jonathan: talked to Chris Ferris, Chair of the Arch group. we're thinking about co-locating the meeting. A proposal would be April 8-9 for the Arch group and April 11-12 for us but we're still looking for a host. Hosts need to provide a room. 36 WG members in desc. [45 members in Arch desc]. Expect to have only 2/3 of the WG participants to show up. We need some logistics, such as white board, network connection (1 or more), projection capabilities, hotel accomodations, dinner (optional) and lunch of course.

Alan: DISA can host the 2 WGs in Washington, D.C. but April 11-12 conflicts with our Board of Directors, before or after is ok. We have a meeting room for up to 40 people. 3 hotels within walking distance, subway, ...

Jonathan: great, let's follow-up on that offline

Don: I might be able to host that week

Jonathan: send us your avaibility for hosting meetings to Jonathan and Philippe.

Pallavi: will we have dialing number for the f2f?

Jonathan: in my experience, it doesn't work well. I discourage people to rely on that.

Glen: from XMLP experience, we had a good meeting over video conference.

Youenn: yes, video + phone worked well for XMLP

Jonathan: will look at it but I strongly encourage to travel in any case.

Sanjiva: happy to host in Sri Lanka any time

[lots of people are willing to host...]

Jeff: I would prefer a co-location with Arch.

Jonathan: I think it's a good idea too.

Call for editors

Selection of editors is a task of the chair.  have received a couple of offers of editing work, but our charter outlines several deliverables, so there's plenty of work:
- Requirements document 
- Usage scenarios 
- Web Services description language specification 
- RDF mapping 
- Binding descriptions for SOAP Version 1.2 over HTTP and HTTP GET and POST methods 
- Primer 
- Test suite 

For now I'll operate on the assumption that each of these deliverables is represented by a separate document or set of documents. Please let me know if you are available as an editor for one or more of these tasks.

Tools available for editors:

- The publication process is much simpler when public documents are authored in XML using the xmlspec DTD. For these documents, Philippe will take care of automatically generating HTML versions that comply with pubrules. For documents authored directly in HTML, the editor is on his own and must verify pubrule compliance himself. 

- Since we are a public WG, editors must be comfortable with keeping a current version up to date and checked into CVS. Documentation is available. Write access requires permission, which we'll provide. 

Jonathan: send me an email of you'd like to be one. we need editors for usage scenario asap. regarding edition itself, xmlspec is the preferred way. if you use HTML, you're on your own. Takes too much time to the editor and the team contact to go over the W3C publication process if you use HTML.

Philippe: and I will not help editors that use HTML anyway.

Jean-Jacques: from my XMLP experience, XML is easier.


Our schedule calls for publishing requirements at around the time of our first FTF. To jumpstart the requirements collection process, I propose that we reverse engineer the requirements for WSDL 1.1, which will give us a base set which we can debate, trim, augment, and prioritize.

Jonathan: need someone to extract the requirements from WSDL 1.1. will be the starting point, then we'll need to prioritize them.

ACTION Jeffrey&Jean-Jacques: to extract requirements from WSDL 1.1 asap.

Jonathan: in general, I prefer things to be on the public list. please collaborate on the public list. I would like to have the requirements out of the way before starting the specification itself. So post and discuss requirements on the list.


Prasad: What is our position regarding WS-I? did anyone look into it?

Resolution: will put on the agenda for next week.

Test Suites

series of interoperability bake-offs originating on the soapbuilders list. See soapbuilders and ilab. 

IONA (Abinarayana), Macromedia (Glen, Tom), IBM and Microsoft (Jeffrey, Keith) will be at the bake-off event in February.

Jonathan: we will need to coordinate the test suite with them.

Summary of new action items
* 2002-02-07. Jeffrey&Jean-Jacques: to extract requirements from WSDL 1.1 asap. 

Scribe: Philippe
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2002 12:39:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:20 UTC