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

RE: Second draft June FTF Agenda - issues to be discussed

From: Liu, Kevin <kevin.liu@sap.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 15:22:11 +0200
Message-ID: <99CA63DD941EDC4EBA897048D9B0061DA9518E@uspalx20a.pal.sap-ag.de>
To: "'Jonathan Marsh '" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "'www-ws-desc@w3.org '" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Hi Jonath,

If we have time in the F2F, I would like to have the following two issues

The first one should be a easy clarification. The second one should at least
be reflected somewhere in the issue list if not resolvable now.


-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Marsh
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Sent: 6/7/02 6:29 PM
Subject: Second draft June FTF Agenda

Mon June 10 9AM
  [09:00] Introductions and logistics
  [09:20] Publication plan
          Input: The current draft of the specification.
          Output: A list of issues to resolve prior to first publication
            (e.g. what namespace?), an expected publication date.

  [10:00] Break

  [10:20] Issues

  [12:00] Lunch

  [13:00] Abstract Model
          Input: Presentation/Proposal by AMTF (Jacek): What is the
            value of an Abstract Model?
          Output: Decision on whether to pursue an Abstract Model, and a
            joint understanding of the form such an Abstract Model
            should take.
  [14:30] Break

  [15:00] Issues

  [17:00] Adjourn

Tue June 11 9AM
  [09:00] Requirements
          Input: Current requirements document, especially the few
            remaining draft requirements; public comments; WSArch 
          Output: Resolution of all outstanding issues and comments,
            plan for next publication.

  [10:00] Break

  [10:20] Requirements continued.

  [12:00] Lunch

  [13:00] Issues

  [14:30] Break

  [15:00] Issues

  [16:45] Break

  [17:00] (Optional) Visit to Echangeur Laboratory of new technology

  [18:00] Adjourn

Wed June 12 

  [09:00] Begin joint session with WS Architecture group
  [09:00] Introductions, logistics
  [09:20] Update on state of the Architecture group
  [09:40] Update on state of the Description group

  [10:00] Break

  [10:20] Usage Scenarios
          Input: Presentation/Proposal by USTF: What is a Usage
            Scenario, what is a Use Case?
          Output: Joint approval of where the line between Usage
            Scenario and Use Case falls.

  [11:20] Requirements

          Input: WSA comments on WSD requirements (ASAP), WSD response
            to WSA input.
          Output: Resolution of WSA comments allowing re-publication of 
            WSD requirements, joint understanding of the overlap of 
            WSD and WSA requirements.

  [12:00] Lunch

  [13:00] End joint session
  [13:00] Issues

  [14:30] Break

  [15:00] Issues

  [17:00] Adjourn

Requirements Issues:

1. Draft items in current requirements doc

1a. R042 
[Draft] The description language SHOULD allow deriving one Interface
from another by extension of the logical group of Messages. (From JS.)

1b. R121 
[Draft] The description language SHOULD be able to be easily integrated
into other markup languages. This may involve the following types of
considerations: media types [IETF RFC 2046]: which should be used for a
compound type, schema wildcarding in the host markup language,
containment semantics: how the interpretation of WSDL is affected by
different containing elements, fragment identifiers: how references that
cross namespace boundaries work. (From MB.)

1c. R120 
[Draft] The description language SHOULD ensure that all conceptual
elements in the description of Messages are addressable by a URI
reference [RFC2396]. (From the Semantic Web. Added 11 April, 2002.
Awaiting clarification from RDF.)

2.Comments on the draft
2a. Editorial?

2b. Support for call flow

3. Arch comments
  hopefully forthcoming

Spec Issues:

1. Extensibility issues
1a. Issue: Extensibility/Open Content Model
  Proposal from Glen

1b. Issue: portType extensibility.
  Evaluate whether this is covered by our general extensibility

2. MEP issues
2a. Issue: Extensible message exchange patterns

2b. Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses?

2c. Issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations
  Proposal from Jeffrey.

3. Service Type issues
3a. Issue: service type.

4. Infoset issues
4a. Should WSDL be infoset-based or not?

5. Publication issues
5a. Spec title
5b. Namespace
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2002 09:22:51 UTC

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