W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > January 2003

[rev 2] Agenda: 20-22 Jan 2003 WS Description WG FTF

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:53:22 -0800
Message-ID: <330564469BFEC046B84E591EB3D4D59C0900CF29@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

[Further rearrangement: swapped WS-I briefing and Requirements comments
discussion to accommodate the attendance of David Orchard (who
originated many of the comments).]

Logistics, including dial-in numbers [1].

  [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/12/WSf2fJanLogistics.html

Monday 20 January
09:00 Introductions and logistics
    - Assignment of scribes
        (pool of likely victims: Erik Ackerman, Sanjiva, Jeff 
        Mischkinsky, Igor Sedukhin, William Vambenepe, 
        Martin Gudgin, Jeffrey Schlimmer)

09:20 Message Exchange Patterns/Output operations.
    - Unified SOAP/WSDL MEPs [2].
    - Interaction proposal alternatives [3].
    - Solicit/Response MEP [4].

  [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jan/0022.html
  [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jan/0035.html

10:30 Break
10:50 Message Exchange Patterns (cont.)

12:00 Lunch
13:00 PortType operation name conflicts [5; part b].

  [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jan/0004.html

15:00 Break
15:20 Properties and Features
    - Amy's summary [6], and suggested agenda
    1. Scope
      a. Should WSDL support only description of SOAP features and 
         properties, or features and properties more generally?
      b. If only SOAP features and properties, should the namespace be 
         the WSDL SOAP namespace, or the WSDL namespace?
      c. If features and properties generally, should WSDL propose a 
         universal syntax, or let each feature definition mandate its
    2. Concrete Binding
      a. Should the current <binding> tree be separated into
         <messageBinding> and <protocolBinding> trees?
      b. Should the concrete binding syntax live in <binding>,
         <messageBinding>, <protocolBinding>, or <service>?
      c. Where, exactly, in the preferred subtree may the new 
         syntactic elements appear?
      d. What are the new syntactic elements?
    3. Abstract Binding
      a. Should it be possible to specify required features and/or
         properties in the <portType> tree?
      b. If so, where in the tree may these requirements appear? 
         (portType, operation, individual messages)
      c. If so, should consistency checks be performed to ensure that 
         a binding that claims to implement a portType contains 
         concrete bindings for required features/properties?
      d. What are the new syntactic elements?

  [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jan/0033.html

17:30 Adjourn

Tuesday 21 January
09:00 Removing message.  Roberto's original proposal at [7].
      Direction suggested by Dale [8]. Roberto will provide an outline
      for the discussion.

  [7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Nov/0035.html
  [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Dec/0040.html

10:30 Break
10:50 Removing message (cont.)

12:00 Lunch
13:00 Property-dependent issues.  Goal is to at least have a plan of 
      attack for those we cannot swiftly resolve.
    - BindingType proposal from Kevin [9].
    - HTTP Binding Issues (6a, 41) [10, 11].
    - Issue 28: transport='uri' [12]
    - Issue 2: SOAPAction has been deprecated, as of SOAP 1.2 
      [13, 14, 15].
  [9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Aug/0009.html
 [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0102.html
 [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jul/0067.html
 [12] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x28
 [13] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x2
 [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Sep/0050.html
 [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Sep/0056.html

15:00 Break
15:20 Issue 25: Interaction between W3C XML Schema and SOAP Data Model 
      Gudge's explains at [16], Roberto's options at [17].
      How do we revive this issue?

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

16:00 WS-I Basic Profile [18] status, and walkthrough of the profile as 
      it relates to WSDL (Prasad).


17:30 Adjourn

Wednesday 22 January
09:00 Requirements Document Last Call comments
    - Request to address attachments [19]
      (IBM\John Ibbotson and IBM\James Snell)
    - Comments re: various requirements [20]
      (BEA\David Orchard)
    - A thorough accessibility review [21]
      (chair of the W3C/WAI Protocols and Formats WG [22])

      Goal of this session is to dispatch some of the easier ones, while
      identifying dependencies among the others (e.g. completion of 
      Requirements for the SOAP Attachments Feature by the XMLP WG).
 [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Dec/0081.html 
 [22] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/

10:30 Break
----[Begin Joint Session with Architecture Group]----
10:50 Status report for dependent documents (Usage Scenarios, 
      Glossary, etc.)

11:00 Message Exchange Patterns - current state of WSDL.

11:20 I18N Web Services Task Force introduction and overview 
        (Martin Duerst).  First WD of Web Services I18N Usage 
        Scenarios [23].

 [23] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-ws-i18n-scenarios-20021220.

11:50 Future FTF meetings
      - Boston: March 2-3 (Desc), March 5-6 (Arch)
      - Rennes: May 12-16 (propose Desc goes first))
      - Toronto: July 28-August 1 (propose Arch goes first)
	- West Coast?: mid-September (propose Sydney :-})

----[End Joint Session with Architecture Group]----
12:00 Adjourn
Received on Friday, 17 January 2003 18:53:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:27 UTC