Minutes, 27 February 2003 WS Description telcon

[I added some regrets I had missed.]

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Prasad Yendluri [mailto:pyendluri@webmethods.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:58 PM
To: Jonathan Marsh
Subject: Minutes, 27 February 2003 WS Description telcon

 

 <http://www.w3.org/> W3C


WSDL 27 Feb 2003


Attendees

Present:
 Erik Ackerman          Lexmark
 Mike Ballantyne        Electronic Data Systems
 David Booth            W3C
 Allen Brookes          Rogue Wave Software
 Roberto Chinnici       Sun Microsystems
 Martin Gudgin          Microsoft
 Tom Jordahl            Macromedia
 Jacek Kopecky          Systinet
 Philippe Le Hégaret    W3C
 Amelia Lewis           TIBCO
 Steve Lind             AT&T
 Lily Liu               webMethods
 Jonathan Marsh         Chair (Microsoft)
 Jeff Mischkinsky       Oracle
 Don Mullen             Tibco
 Arthur Ryman           IBM
 Jeffrey Schlimmer      Microsoft
 Jerry Thrasher         Lexmark
 William Vambenepe      Hewlett-Packard
 Sanjiva Weerawarana    IBM
 Steven White           SeeBeyond
 Umit Yalcinalp         Oracle
 Prasad Yendluri        webMethods,  Inc.
Regrets:
 Youenn Fablet          Canon
 Steve Graham           Global Grid Forum


 Sandeep Kumar          Cisco
 Jean-Jacques Moreau    Canon
 Dale Moberg            Cyclone Commerce
 
Chair: Jonathan Marsh 
Scribe: Prasad Yendluri

Contents


*	Agenda Items <>  

1.	Approval Minutes <> 
2.	Action item review  <> 
3.	Administrivia <> 
4.	New Issues <> 
5.	One porttype per service.
6.	Removing Message
7.	Properties and Features

*	Summary of Action Items <> 

  _____  

Approval of Minutes: 

JM: Approval of minutes of Feb 13 and Feb 20 telcons. Any comments on Minutes? 

None. Minutes marked as approved.


Action item review 


[1] Roberto & Gudge working on a proposal to remove the Message scope(?). 
JM:  Gudge would have something to organize our discussion at the F2F? 
Gudge: I will have something.
JM: How much time we need to schedule at the F2F? 
TJ: Is Roboerto going to be at the F2F?
JM: Roberto is not going to present (MarcH sitting in). He has been a bit pessimistic about his proposal off late.
Roberto: Need to work on binding before we continue.
JM:  Lets see what happens at the F2F.

PENDING

[2] Jacek to write up text on SOAP response MEP after the abstract MEPs come out (which they did). 
JM: Is that what you were expecting Jacek?
JK: No. They had a different idea of MEPs. The MEP discussion is underway on mailing list. I am not sure if the AI still stands? We can keep it until discussion concludes. I try to think how SOAP Response projects into these abstract MEPs. Hope to have something for the F2F. 
JM: You think there is some missing glue to do that projection?
JK: I have not thought about it too much yet..

PENDING.

[3] Arthur to propose improvements to the URL replacement mechanism. 
JM: I assume still pending for after F2F sometime?
AR: Yes in progress. I will also work with Philippe at F2F.

PENDING

[4] Philippe to re-do HTTP bindings to allow per-method operation names etc.
PL: Pending as well. I should start working  start working before the F2F.

PENDING

[5] Jonathan to dig up the history on one-portType-per-service issue.
JM:  I did not find anything on that issue. I have an agenda item below to try and address that.

DONE.

[6] Philippe to write up list of proposed renamings.

DONE.


Administrivia


a.Republishing Part 1

JM: Item of highest priority is republishing  public working draft of Part-1. I call for any objections or discussion if we are ready to republish part-1? Or approve republishing of public working draft of Part-1 today. 
AR: Resolution of  renaming, are we going to defer until after republishing?
JM: We have an item on the F2F agenda to go over that. We will look at Philippe's summary of name changing proposals next week. 

JM: Gudge sent out list of changes (to working draft part-1). Main changes were getting R120 Appendix in there and the operation naming. 
JM: Hearing no objections we will record a unanimous consent to republishing a new public working draft of part-1.
JM: It is in Philippe's court to now change the dates and get that done.
PL: Yes. It should be finished by Monday. AI PL(?)

b.March FTF
JM: We have couple of changes in attendance. Registration is up-to-date.

c. FTF agenda
JM: I sent out a draft agenda. I will try and send a revised agenda tomorrow. Anybody have comments or like to rearrange anyway.
TJ: Looks like Monday is properties and features day.
PL: Can we move my item on renaming out of the 2-3pm slot on Tuesday?
TJ: Can we do renaming first? It can be quick.
JM: If we add new element names etc. in properties and features discussion and if we change things in message discussion, it would be good to tackle renaming after that.
JM: We will move it to 4pm. PL ok?
PL: Yes.
JM: If you think of something let me know by today. I will send out the revised agenda tomorrow. We can make any last minute revisions on Monday.
AR: Is the plenary session on Wed?
JM: Yes. Our meeting is 9-5:30 Mon and Tues.
PL: Did you see the agenda for the tech plenary day? I don't know if it had been forwarded.
JM: I fwd'ed what I received (outline) to the list. There is an attempt to make it technical.

d. Properties & Features Task Force
JM: Is there any news or report ? Glen not here today.
PL: We will continue our work on better defining the intent and we will be able to present our results at the F2F.
AR: Jonathan are getting any feedback on the issues you raised with the WS-Arch group? On the removal of the "use" attribute etc.
JM: Philippe pinged me last week. My mail was supposed to go out 6 weeks ago. It just never made it. Some mail problems. I did send it out few days back. Expect some feedback now. On the R120 stuff it has been quiet. 

e. Usage Scenarios
f.  www-ws mailing list and BOF
JM: WS coordination group has interest in reviving the www-ws mailing list and using that for coordinating between semantic-web and web services activity. I have extracted the rationale what is going to go on with that list. See link number [28] on administrivia agenda today. There is also a ?table reserved at the tech-plenary to get that jump started. If you have any q? I can take them to the CG.

g. No telcon next week
JM: We will have a call week after next week.

JM: Any other administrivia items.
PL: Yes. W3C system team changed the way they are managing the web accounts (fixed a bug). If your W3C member web site access does no longer work, you are using an old account that has been closed and you need to update your status with us. Send an email to webreq@w3.org . sysreq would work as well, but webreq is slightly better I believe.


New Issues


XMLP WG thinks we should describe attachments

JM: We have a statement from XMLP WG that we should describe attachments. We should wait to see what they come up with before we start that item. We should record that as an issue somewhere, not sure which draft.


One porttype per service.


JM: I could not find any issue for the one porttype per service but, there were similar things in the ServiceTye proposal. Sanjiva can you send some text to the list to revive the issue and we can take it up at the F2F.
Sanjiva: Yes.


Fault naming.


JM: On F2F agenda. We have a proposal Paco.


Removing message


JM: On F2F agenda.


Properties and features


JM: On F2F agenda. Being handled by task force.


HTTP Binding Issues


JM: Pending action from Philippe & Arthur. Will probably take up after F2F.
JM: We will be able take up other issues below after the Properties and Features work is done.


BindingType proposal


Issue 28: transport='uri'


Issue 2: SOAPAction has been deprecated, as of SOAP 1.2


Meeting Adjurns..


Summary of Action Items


ACTION: Phillippe to push the public draft out?
ACTION: Editors to capture the "XMLP WG thinks we should describe attachments" issue.

  _____  

Prasad Yendluri 
$Date: 2002/02/27 $