- From: Don Mullen <donmullen@tibco.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 10:53:34 -0400
- To: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
W3C Web Services Description Teleconference 7/11/2002
Minutes of Meeting
Present
Mike Ballantyne Electronic Data Systems
David Booth W3C
Roberto Chinnici Sun Microsystems
Glen Daniels Macromedia
Youenn Fablet Canon
Dietmar Gaertner Software AG
Martin Gudgin Microsoft
Philippe Le Hégaret W3C
Steve Lind AT&T
Michael Mahan Nokia
Jonathan Marsh Chair (Microsoft)
Jean-Jacques Moreau Canon
Don Mullen Tibco
Jeffrey Schlimmer Microsoft
Igor Sedukhin Computer Associates
William Stumbo Xerox
Steve Tuecke Global Grid Forum
William Vambenepe Hewlett-Packard
Sanjiva Weerawarana IBM
Don Wright Lexmark
Joyce Yang Oracle
Prasad Yendluri webMethods, Inc.
Barbara Zengler Daimler Chrysler
Regrets:
Allen Brookes Rogue Wave Software
Michael Champion Software AG
Laurent De Teneuille L'Echangeur
Tim Finin University of Maryland
Steve Graham Global Grid Forum
Tom Jordahl Macromedia
Jacek Kopecky Systinet
Dan Kulp IONA
Kevin Canyang Liu SAP
Pallavi Malu Intel
Michael Mealling Verisign
Stefano Pogliani Sun
Jochen Ruetschlin DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology
Arthur Ryman IBM
Daniel Schutzer Citigroup
Dave Solo Citigroup
Jerry Thrasher Lexmark
Absent:
Mike Davoren W. W. Grainger
Sandeep Kumar Cisco Systems
Mike McHugh W. W. Grainger
Jeff Mischkinsky Oracle
Dale Moberg Cyclone Commerce
Johan Pauhlsson L'Echangeur
Waqar Sadiq Electronic Data Systems
Adi Sakala IONA Technologies
Sandra Swearingen U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force
Agenda:
1. Assign scribe : Don Mullen
2. Representation change: Mario Jeckle replaced by Barbara Zengler.
3. Approval of minutes from 27 June telcon [6].
APPROVED.
4. Action Items
2002-06-20: Sanjiva. Champion for 6c. Issue: SOAPAction1 #1
[PENDING]
2002-06-20: Jean-J. Analyze whether WSD should gneralize a
mechanism to provide protocol headers. This was
discussed as part of 6d. Issue: SOAPAction2 #2
actor URI in WSDL? #17
[TWO PARTS: One PENDING, One DONE]
2002-06-20: JeffS Champion for 6h. Issue: Default for transport
of <soap:binding> #18
[PENDING]
2002-06-20: Issue Editor. Jean-J identifies dup issue: 6q. Issue:
SOAP 1.1 backward compatibility support? #32 (Needs
Clarification.)
[DONE]
2002-06-27: JS will add the draft requirements to the document.
[DONE]
2002-06-27: JS will add media types as a MUST requirement.
[DONE]
2002-06-27: SW will distribute a draft of final draft by the close
of the day on Thursday.
[DONE]
2002-06-27: Issues list editors to look at the issues in Agenda item 9
and make sure that they are not duplicate and add them
to issue list.
[DONE]
2002-06-27: JM will think about what should be done with the
suggestion for a note or appendix on 1.2 -> 1.2 transition.
[PENDING]
-------------------
5. WSDL Spec published (Cheers)
JM: Plan to publish again in September -- too aggresive, considering
August off?
Draft of Primer available by F2F
Shoot for some time in October / November?
Possibly discuss timing at the next F2F
During August -- emails can continue, but no telcon or resolutions.
-------------------
6. Requirements document
Plan to discuss at F2F
-------------------
7. SOAP 1.2 Last Call
Last call announcement:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2002AprJun/0141.html
JM: Request for volunteers
Feedback required by July 18
Plan to go directly from LC to Proposed REC
Do we have time to give feedback -- possibly send a week late?
JM: Review this week, post comments at telcon next week,
decide how much time needed to forward to XMLP.
Sanjiva: Propose telcon between interested parties.
JM: Glen, Sanjiva, Phillipe look at MEP part
JM: JM to set up Monday at 11am eastern for 1 hour
- Glen, Sanjiva, Phillippe, etc. Open to everyone.
JM: Asks everyone who can to review and post comments.
-------------------
8. Editorial Issues
JM: 51, 33, and 50 identified as not editorial
JM: Any others?
No.
JM: Editors -- move forward on editorial issues.
-------------------
9. New Issues
Hoisting SOAP Binding attributes
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0058.html
Name AII on input/output EIIs in port type operations -
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0061.html]
JM: Martin's issue not yet a new issue -- Martin to take another
look.
Phillipe:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0243.html
-> 14. Remove name attribute
-------------------
10. Reopen issue-intra-port-relationship [21]?
JM: Weak documentation on why we closed this issue.
Some question on meeting notes on whether it was closed or not?
JM: Ok to reopen the issue -- or think about another week.
JM: Concensus to close issue with reverse decision.
*** Resolution: Close issue : remove the restriction intra-port
relationships
-------------------
11. Issue: Overloading operations
- postpone another week.
-------------------
12. SOAP 1.2 support TF [20]
JM: Origin of task force to assign champions to particular issues
-- issue 23 in particular.
JM: Do we need to do all of SOAP 1.2? Concerned that task force is
developing proposals for all of soap issues.
JJM: Looking at current issues in the list that are soap 1.2 related
-- different view on the issues list.
JM: Introduced any new issues -- that are not already reflected in
issues list.
JJM: No -- may need to raise a few more that we have not done yet.
JM: Goal of places in soap where we aren't fully supported -- good
goal.
Want to make sure original task done.
JM: One deliverable -- categorize existing issues -- assertion that
the
list is comprehensive in covering soap 1.2 functionality.
JJM: Pretty much have what the task force has to deliver
-- MEPs something we aren't supported
-- also features and bindings to other protocols.
JM: Issue 23 closed?
JJM: Probably
JM: Continue with Monday call and look deeper into MEP issue.
Continue to look for things that we might not be supporting
fully in SOAP 1.2.
-------------------
13. Issue 4: Namespaces
- Martin's proposal :
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0168.html
- Prasad's mail:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0029.html
Gudge: If use = 'literal' then namespace not applicable.
Sanjiva: Issue of type and element
Gudge: if encoded, use type, not element
Move discussion to email?
Gudge: close with clarification -- if bigger issue makes mute,
that's ok
JM: Propose to close the issue as Martin/Prasad : use='literal'
style='doc'
namespace attribute on soap:body not applicable - resolved.
**** Resolution: Issue 4 closed using Prasad's ammendment to Martin's
proposal.
-------------------
14. Issue: optional "name" attribute of <definition>
Sanjiva's proposal to remove this attribute
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0175.html.
JM: Postpone for Tom to respond?
Glen: Does not know how strongly Tom feels about this.
ACTION: Glen to ping Tom on issue-remove-optional-name-of-definition
-------------------
15. Issue issue-multiple-services.
Sanjiva's proposal at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0165.html
Issue already was closed -- allowing multiple.
-------------------
16. Issue 5: EncodingStyle.
Arthur recommends closing as a dupe of Issue #30. [31]
Postponed.
-------------------
17. Issue 25: Interaction between W3C XML Schema and SOAP Data Model
Gudge: summary
Roberto: WSDL 1.1 - no formal description of data model schema was
-- or how xml schema in wsdl related to soap data model --
needs work to clarify.
Sanjiva: agree to clarify -- clarification approach
- drop concept of encoding is weak, but something to
consider
JM: Need someone to work up proposal on this.
Glen: express in straight schema - known how to map to encoded thing
-- would solve a lot of problems (use annotations?)
Gudge: Would like to work on that -- when do you want it by?
Glen: Very attractive, but feel like there is going to be push back
-- schema not designed to do....
Gudge: That magic exists already today -- just describing the magic.
Status quo is unacceptable.
Roberto: describe in our spec the rules -- creating a schema for the
encoded graph, not the data that then gets encoded
Gudge: Do we want to expend effort to describe soap encoding in xml
schema?
Mapping rules for soap encoding to xml schema.
Gudge: Second question -- just want to describe the graph itself.
Sanjiva: Soap encoding exists -- can't ignore. Two data models.
Gudge: Why two?
Gudge: XML Schema might be wrong language to use.
Sanjiva: Tools available for XML Schema -- would be nice to
leverage.
Roberto: If data model what we care about
-- then start there and see if we can map to xml schema.
Gudge: Soap group tried to do this and basically punted -- too hard.
If want type information in graph, here is how to achieve it.
Gudge: Did not indicate how to have a schema that maps to actual
soap message.
Gudge: Schema does not describe direct edge labeled graphs.
Sanjiva: Able to create a schema for the actual wire message --
people have asked for this.
Gudge: If you can do this -- why isn't the schema used to describe
the message?
<roberto>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Apr/0108.html
Gudge: Don't understand desire to describe something and then say
-- "it does not look like that."
Gudge: Designing a new language to describe this is not
the right thing -- don't have time.
JM: If we can design such a language -- understand reqs are
-- use xml schema as a framework. Possibly not total waste of
time.
JM: Question re: gudge's interest graphs instead of soap encoding
Sanjiva: Might not want to map to soap -- something else
JM: What questions we want to answer : define the tasks:
Roberto: Take three options and move to email
ACTION: Roberto to inumerate three options on Issue 25 and post to email
-------------------
18. Issue 30: soap:body encodingStyle
Arthur's proposal [31]
Postponed.
-------------------
19. Issue service-type: [33] OK to wait on Abstract Component work to
provide a more concrete proposal?
JM: Hoping when Gudge presents abstract component model
-- might bring clarity on these issues and a proposal to resolve
them.
Reasonable?
Sanjiva: Do have two issues on service-type - ACM won't resolve.
Gudge: ACM may help us think about the issues
-------------------
20. Issue remove-solicit-response-operations: Removing solicit-response
and notifications. [34] OK to schedule for FTF?
Appropriate forum is F2F
JM: David's presentation - describing issues
David: Jeff and Gudge looked at it -- taking action to move forward
with this
ACTION: DavidB to do Solicit/Response presentation at September F2F
-------------------
21. HTTP Binding Issues (6a, 41)
Jeffrey recommends no change [35].
JM: Put this top of agenda for next week
Sanjiva: One week not adequate for this -- Sanjiva to post email
ACTION: Sanjiva to post email on issues 6a, 41
-------------------
Summary of Action Items:
2002-06-20: Jean-J. Analyze whether WSD should gneralize a
mechanism to provide protocol headers. This was
discussed as part of 6d. Issue: SOAPAction2 #2
actor URI in WSDL? #17
2002-06-20: JeffS Champion for 6h. Issue: Default for transport
of <soap:binding> #18
2002-06-27: JM will think about what should be done with the
suggestion for a note or appendix on 1.2 -> 1.2 transition.
2002-07-11: Glen to ping Tom on issue-remove-optional-name-of-definition
2002-07-11: Roberto to inumerate three options on Issue 25 and post to email
2002-07-11: DavidB to do Solicit/Response presentation at September F2F
2002-07-11: Sanjiva to post email on issues 6a, 41
Received on Friday, 12 July 2002 10:58:54 UTC