Agenda, 3 February 2004 WS Desc telcon

0.  Dial in information (members only) [.1]:

See the public WG page [.2] for pointers to current documents and other
information, and the private page [.3] for administrative matters.

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

[.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2005Feb/0002.html 
[.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/
[.3] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/admin

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Agenda

1.  Assign scribe.  Lucky minute taker for this week is one of:
      Amy Lewis, Bijan Parsia, Sanjiva Weerawarana, Jacek Kopecky,
      Prasad Yendluri, David Booth, Kevin Liu, Youenn Fablet, 
      Glen Daniels, Roberto Chinnici, Allen Brookes

--------------------------------------------------------------------
2.  Approval of minutes:
  - Jan 27 [.1]
  - FTF minutes [.2, .3] and summary [.4]
    I can't find the mythical LC103 anywhere.  Will leave that number
    intentionally blank in the issues list.

[.1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/att-0092/2005012
7-ws-desc-minutes.html
[.2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/att-0091/2005012
0-ws-desc-minutes.html
[.3]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/att-0091/2005012
0-ws-desc-minutes.html
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0091.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------
3.  Review of Action items [.1].  Editorial actions [.2].

?         2004-04-01: Marsh will get schema tf going.
?         2004-09-02: Bijan to create stylesheet to generate a
                      table of components and properties.
?         2004-09-16: Editors to move App C to RDF Mapping spec, 
                      except the frag-id which will move 
                      within media-type reg appendix.
?         2004-09-16: Editors to fix paragraph 6-9 of section 
                      2.1.1 moved into 2.1.2
                      which talks about the syntax.
?         2004-10-14: Editors to add a statement like: 
                      The Style property may constrain both 
                      input and output, however a particular 
                      style may constrain in only one 
                      direction. In Section 2.4.1.1 of Part 1.
                      (subsumed by LC21 resolution?)
DONE [.5] 2004-11-09: DBooth and Roberto to describe 
                      option 2 (remove definition of processor 
                      conformance, write up clear guidelines 
                      to developers) (LC5f)
?         2004-11-09: DaveO to work on text for option 
                      3 (redefining conformance in terms 
                      of building the component model) 
                      (LC5f)
?         2004-11-09: DaveO will recast the @compatibleWith 
                      proposal using an extension namespace. 
                      (LC54)
?         2004-11-10: Sanjiva to write the rationale for 
                      rejecting LC75a
?         2004-11-10: Glen will post an e-mail describing 
                      the compromise proposal on formal objections.
?         2004-11-10: Editor remove ambiguity if it exists
?         2004-11-10: Sanjiva will write up this proposal 
                      and email it to the list as a response 
                      to the objection.
?         2004-11-11: Anish to propose additions to the 
                      test suite for the purpose of 
                      interoperability testing.
?         2004-11-11: Editors of part 2 and 3 to add text 
                      about WSDLMEP and SOAP mep mapping that 
                      points to section 2.3 of part 3 (LC48b) 
DONE [.6] 2004-11-18: DBooth to propose text to clarify that 
                      a service must implement everything in 
                      its description.
?         2004-11-18: Mini-task force to propose one or two 
                      proposals for the group for LC5f.
DONE [.10] 2004-12-02: DBooth to draft note clarifying that 
                      (a) optional extension can change the 
                      semantics; and (b) that if semantics are 
                      going to change at runtime, it should be 
                      indicated in the WSDL 
?         2004-12-03: Glen and Asir to help craft the specfic text 
                      for the editors.
?         2004-12-03: Glen to send example on feature stuff for primer
DONE [.8] 2004-12-03: Hugo or JMarsh to write up schema group remarks
?         2004-12-16: Part 3 Editors to update the HTTP binding with 
                      one of the above versions of text
?         2005-01-06: MTD Editors to add note saying content-type
                      is not sufficient, information to be 
                      provided via other mechanism, for 
                      example xsi:type"
?         2005-01-06: MTD editors implement proposal 2 for issue 
                      260.
?         2005-01-06: Umit? to respond to Larry, "not dynamic, 
                      other solutions equally bad, not 
                      recommendation track, if problems
                      happy to consider those"
DONE [.6] 2005-01-13: DBooth to rework his text with 
                      comments from A. Manes
                      /2004Dec/0024.html without the *stars*
?         2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      implement issue 261 resolution
?         2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      implement issue 262 resolution
?         2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      implement 262 and 273
?         2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      incorporate the text at 2004Dec/0022.html
?         2005-01-13: Editors of media type doc to 
                      resolve 275 editorially
DONE [.9] 2005-01-13: Jon to reopen LC21
?         2005-01-13: Umit to reply to issuer 270
?         2005-01-13: Umit to respond to Ian Hickson 
                      about issue 271
DONE [.7] 2005-01-19: dbooth and KevinL to scope remaining 
                      primer work and identify who needs to 
                      supply what advanced topic sections
?         2005-01-19: Part 1 Editors to call out the difference 
                      between WSDL 1.1 and 2.0 in respect to 
                      single interface per service, and 
                      indicate alternatives
?         2005-01-19: Part 1 Editors to rewrite ONMR as Best practice.
?         2005-01-19: Hugo to write a proposal for adding 
                      an optional Action attribute in line 
                      with WS Addressing (LC84b)
?         2005-01-19: Arthur and Asir to look for more edge cases 
                      ref LC20 and LC27.
?         2005-01-19: Part 1 Editors to add the intersection 
                      rule for f&p composition.
DONE [.4] 2005-01-20: DaveO to further refine his header 
                      proposal based on the input he has 
                      received during the f2f
?         2005-01-20: Asir to think about mU and possibly 
                      propose some clarification text
?         2005-01-20: Arthur to come up with primer text 
                      to show fault reuse and fault code.
DONE      2005-01-27: Marsh to follow up with Gudge on 
                      wsdl:include transitive issue
DONE      2005-01-27: Marsh to put primer on agenda next week.
DONE [.3] 2005-01-27: Marsh to send a note to WS-Chor that 
                      we have no comments.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/#actions
[.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/actions.html
[.3]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor-comments/2005Jan/0028
.html
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0040.html
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0099.html
[.6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0026.html
[.7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Feb/0004.html
[.8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2005Jan/0029.html
[.9] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC106
[.10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Feb/0006.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
4.  Administrivia
  a. Good Standing:
   - Have sent mails to some member's AC reps
  b. Mar 3,4 Boston [.1]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TP2005/

------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Primer [.1]
 - DBooth and Kevin solicit help for Advanced Topics section [.2]

[.1]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-primer.ht
ml
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Feb/0004.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
6.  Media Type Description issues [.1]
 a. Issue 272 Architectural issues [.2]
    - Awaiting more examples from Henry.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#detailList
[.2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-media-types/2004Nov/0011.h
tml

------------------------------------------------------------------
7.  Last Call Issues [.1].  Comments list [.2]
  - ServiceGroup revival [.2]. Propose to not reopen this issue.
  - LC102: What is the SOAP MEP for in-only? [.3]
  - LC104: Proposed Changes to the Interface Component, Features 
           and Properties [.4]
  - LC105: Proposal for Simplifications to the Component Model [.5]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0088.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0027.html
[.4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0060.html
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0056.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
8.  Motion to approve the following text:
  - Meaning of WSDL document [.1]
  - Optional extensions [.2]

[.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0026.html
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Feb/0006.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
9.  Include/Import issues
   - Issue LC75t: WSDL 2.0 LC Comments (t) [.1]
   - Issue LC92: wsdl:include semantics is different from 
                 xs:include [.2]
   - Asir's proposal [.3]
   - From last week: WG thought this was intentional but couldn't
     recall why.
   - Marsh reports that Gudge reports it looks like a copy/paste 
     error, suggests accepting the proposal.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC75t
[.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC92
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0059.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Issue LC60 follow-up [.1]
  - XML Schema validator results [.2]
  - Henry's response [.3]

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC60
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0068.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0095.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Issue LC5f: QA Review on WSDL 2.0 Part 1, intro and conformance
                issues (f) [.1]
  - Roberto's proposal [.2]
  - No final resolution from FTF, AIs to DBooth/Roberto and DaveO 
    to write up competing proposals
  - DBooth/Roberto's proposal [.3]
  - Mini-TF to work on a single proposal (stalled out).  Want to see
    whether we're still waiting for an alternative proposal before
    deciding the issue.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC5f
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Oct/0027.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0099.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Issue 76d: First class support for headers [.1]
  - DaveO's v1.2 Headers proposal from Jan FTF. [.2]
  - Asir's proposal for a first-class header support [.3]
  - Asir's proposal for SOAP-specific header support [.4]
  - Do we need another proposal, to resurrect binding-level
    SOAP headers?

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC76d
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0040.html
[.3]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/att-0044/first-c
lass-headers.html
[.4]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/att-0094/soap-he
ader-blocks.html

------------------------------------------------------------------ 
13. Component model changes
  - LC104: Proposed Changes to the Interface Component, Features 
           and Properties [.1]
  - See if this proposal is non-contentious.
  - LC105: Proposal for Simplifications to the Component Model [.2]
  - Arthur's modification to the LC105 proposal [.3]
  - Allow Arthur some time to introduce the proposal, possibly 
    taking an AI to send an updated proposal.

[.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0060.html
[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0056.html
[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Jan/0066.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Issue LC74: Idle question [.1]
  - Can WSDL 2.0 import WSDL 1.0?
  - Note that the resolution to LC5e [.2] defines WSDL Document as 
    WSDL 2.0 namespace.
  - Options:
    a) No.  Spec (with LC5e resolution) is clear enough.
    b) No.  Specifically note that i*ing 1.1 docs is not supported.
    c) Yes.  Change spec to define that this is possible, though
       how to turn a WSDL 1.1 doc into WSDL 2.0 components is not
       defined.

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC74
[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC5e
 
------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Issue LC54: WSDL Last Call issue
  - Awaiting DaveO's further action to cast @compatibleWith as an
    extension

[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC54

------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Issue LC75w: WSDL 2.0 LC Comments (w) [.1]
  - Relax requirement that include href must be dereferencable.

 [.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC75w

------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Other issues if time allows (ha!)

Received on Wednesday, 2 February 2005 22:58:37 UTC