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

Agenda for 5 Sept 2002 WS Description WG

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 11:17:40 -0700
Message-ID: <330564469BFEC046B84E591EB3D4D59C0787A94C@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Dial in information (members only) [0]:

[0] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Sep/0000.html

See the public WG page [1] for pointers to current documents and other
information, and the private page [2] for administrative matters. 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/admin

If you have additions to the agenda, please email them to the WG list
before the start of the telcon.


1.  Assign scribe.  Lucky minute taker for this week is:
      Jochen Ruetschlin (fallback Bill Stumbo, Sandra Swearingen, Jerry
Thrasher, Steve Tuecke, William Vambenepe, Don Wright, Joyce Yang)

2.  Approval of minutes [3].  Pallavi and Barbara sent late regrets.

[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0135.html

3.  Review of Action items.
?        2002-07-21: GlenD and JJM to write up proposal for handling 
                     MEPs with regard to Soap	
?        2002-07-21: GLEN & Sanjiva to write up the comment about MEPs
                     & features to XMLP group
?        2002-07-21: GlenD to send DavidB details on hosting November
PENDING  2002-07-21: JM to decide potential November F2F overlap on Wed
                     Nov 13 with Arch
?        2002-07-21: Jeffrey & Gudge to flesh out a proposal for
                     omitting operation from soap binding
?        2002-07-21: Don Mullen to write up an issue on transport
DONE [4] 2002-07-25: Glen write up an issue on transport URIs compliance
                     with SOAP
?        2002-07-25: Sanjiva and Gudge to work on combining the AM

[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0132.html

4.  SOAP 1.2 Last Call [9, 10, 11] call for review [12].  Awaiting text
from Glen and/or Sanjiva.  I think we missed the boat on this one.

[9] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part0/ 
[10] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/ 
[11] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part2/ 
[12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0001.html

5.  FTF Agenda
Review, rearrange and augment first draft of the agenda [13].  Note that
the facilities don't accommodate overlapping groups, and we will thus
plan to end at noon on Wed.

[13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Sep/0004.html
(members only)

6.  New Issues
Philippe points out a couple of public comments on the public comments
list [13].  What process do we want to follow (pre-last-call) to respond
to these comments and make sure real ones appear on our issues list?

[14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-desc-comments/

7.  SOAP TF Status?  Need more meetings?  Is [15] the output?
Conclusions so far:
  (1) We need to be able to express MEPs in the SOAP binding.
  (2) The ability to describe features and MEPs at the abstract level
      would be a good thing, but right now we don't know how much effort
      it would take to do so.
  (3) Feedback to XMLP WG: lack of something (such as a header) to
      express the MEP in use.  (Glen: perhaps we should say that, for 
      each binding, there must be a way to identify unambiguously the 
      MEP in use; of course, for bindings that support just one MEP 
      that's a no-op).
  (4) Currently, there is no well-defined one-way MEP.

[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0034.html

This topic was deferred last time.  Is there anything more we need to do

8. Proposal: Hoisting SOAP binding attributes [16].  Roberto's amendment
at [17].

[16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0058.html
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0105.html

9. Issue 51: Asymmetry between soap:body and soap:header [18].  Thread
starts at [19] (Kevin), continues at [20] and [21].

[18] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x51
[19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0048.html
[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0049.html 
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0081.html 

10. Issue 25: Interaction between W3C XML Schema and SOAP Data Model 
    Gudge's explains at [22], Roberto's options at [23].

[22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0186.html
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0071.html


11. Issue 5: EncodingStyle
    Issue 30: soap:body encodingStyle 
    Dietmar's soaptf proposal for encoding and use attributes. [24]
    Arthur's recommendations. [25, 26]

[24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Jul/0016.html 
[25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0178.html
[26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0178.html

12. Issue 18: Default for transport of <soap:binding> [27]. Jeffrey's
proposal at [28].

[28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0122.html

13. HTTP Binding Issues (6a, 41)
    Jeffrey recommends no change [29].
    Sanjiva is mulling this over [30].

[29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0102.html
[30] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0067.html

- Jonathan
Received on Wednesday, 4 September 2002 14:17:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:25 UTC