XML Protocol WG teleconference minutes: 7 February 2001

Akamai Technologies Mark Nottingham      principal
Allaire   Glen Daniels   principal
AT&T Michah Lerner  alternate
Canon     Jean-Jacques Moreau principal
Commerce One   David Burdett  principal
Compaq    Yin-Leng Husband    principal
DaimlerChrysler R. & Tech     Mario Jeckle    principal
DevelopMentor  Martin Gudgin  principal
Engenia Software    Eric Jenkins   alternate
Group 8760     Dick Brooks    ebXML contact
Hewlett Packard     David Ezell    principal
Hewlett Packard     Stuart Williams      alternate
IBM  John Ibbotson  principal
IBM  David Fallside chair
Intel     Randy Hall     principal
Interwoven     Mark Hale principal
Library of Congress Ray Denenberg  principal
Lotus Development   Noah Mendelsohn      principal
Matsushita Electric Ryuji Inoue    principal
Microsoft Corporation    Paul Cotton     alternate
Microsoft Corporation    Henrik Nielsen  principal
Mitre     Marwan Sabbouh principal
Netscape  Vidur Apparao  principal
Novell    Scott Isaacson principal
OMG  Henry Lowe     principal
Oracle    Jim Trezzo     alternate
Oracle    David Clay     principal
Rogue Wave     Patrick Thompson    alternate
SAP AG    Gerd Hoelzing  alternate
SAP AG    Volker Wiechers     principal
Software AG    Michael Champion    principal
Sun Microsystems    Marc Hadley    principal
Sun Microsystems    Mark Baker     alternate
Unisys    Lynne Thompson principal
Unisys    Nick Smilonich alternate
W3C  Yves Lafon     team contact
W3C  Hugo Haas alt team contact   
XMLSolutions   Kevin Mitchell principal

Interwoven     Ron Daniel     alternate
Allaire   Simeon Simeonov     alternate
AT&T Mark Jones     principal
Canon     Herve Ruellan  alternate
Commerce One   Murray Maloney alternate
DevelopMentor  Don Box   alternate
Engenia Software    Jeffrey Kay    principal
IBM  Fransisco Cubera    alternate
Library of Congress Rich Greenfield      alternate
Mitre     Paul Denning   alternate
Netscape  Ray Whitmer    alternate
Rogue Wave     Murali Janakiraman  principal
Software AG    Dietmar Gaertner    alternate
XMLSolutions   John Evdemon   alternate

Bowstreet Alex Ceponkus (carpT)    alternate
Calico Commerce     Rekha Nagarajan      principal
Cisco     Krishna Sankar principal
Compaq    Kevin Perkins  alternate
DaimlerChrysler R. & Tech     Andreas Riegg   alternate
Data Research Associates Mark Needleman  principal
DataChannel    Brian Eisenberg     principal
Ericsson Research Canada Nilo Mitra      principal
Fujitsu Software Corporation  Kazunori Iwasa  principal
Fujitsu Software Corporation  Masahiko Narita      alternate
Informix Software   Soumitro Tagore      alternate
Philips Research    Amr Yassin     alternate
Philips Research    Yasser alSafadi      principal
Tibco     Frank DeRose   principal
Vitria Technology Inc.   Waqar Sadiq     principal
WebMethods     Randy Waldrop  principal
Xerox     Tom Breuel     primary  

Active Data Exchange     Eric Fedok      alternate
Active Data Exchange     Richard Martin  principal
Bowstreet James Tauber   principal
Epicentric     Bjoern Heckel  principal
Epicentric     Dean Moses     alternate
Informix Software   Charles Campbell     principal
IONA Technologies   Eric Newcomer  alternate
IONA Technologies   Oisin Hurley   principal
Jamcracker     David Orchard  principal
Progress Software   Peter Lecuyer  alternate
Vitria Technology Inc.   Richard Koo     alternate

1. Call for AOB:

2. Agenda review:

3. Approval of minutes:

4. Action Items:

Requirements Section Leads: 4.2, 4.5 pending for 1st pass mapping.

David Ezell 4.2,: received some comments. Mainly from Henrik. Where are we headed with this. DF just 1st pass response. ACTION item done. Need to now push on mapping on email.

Paul Cotton: Just posted section review today.

Nilo: missed scenarios 19,20,21,23,34 Done:

Henrik: Include Nilo's items: Done

Hugo: Status of XML Protocol version of SOAP: Done

John Ibbotson: DS5, DS6 -> Henrik done

John Ibbotson: Deconstruct DS7: Sent out. Some responses initially from Nilo -> Agenda item 10: Done

Marting Gudgin: Intermediary Glossary item: done and on agenda

John Ibboson: DS8 -> Henrik: done

David F: Clarification question to Glen Daniels. Done and response from Glen

Paul Denning: Make changes to DS810 and send to list: pending.

David Clay: Question about how to handle binary attachment issues.
David F: Said would surface in next 2 weeks. Will do so shortly

5. Progress on Spec Document.

Hugo: Really no progress. Problems in translating Schema pieces.

David F: May be premature to be addressing Schema issues. Schema in the initial draft doesn't have to align with Schema recommendation.

Jim Trezzo: Suggestion that there is considerable Schema expertise in XML Protocol-WG could get some insight help from them.

...[failed to capture]

Henrik: Knows that Allen Brown has been playing with updated schema.

6. Abstract Model Report:

Stuart: Posted a revised draft to the subgroup last Friday. Held telephone conference on Tuesday and there are good synergies with the AMG discussions and intermediary discussions. Telecon on Tuesday was very high energy and the subgroup were motivated to continue with a further conference on  Thursday (2/8). There is growing concensus around the outline model (the first main diagram), the terms it uses and their relationship to the glossary. Plan to do a clean re-write as we converge on terminology. Expect to have a clean revised draft ahead of the f2f.

7 Use of the Phrase XP

David F: Noting cologuial use of the phrase "XP". Noted that Microsoft are using the term XP and we need to separate ourselves from any implied connection with these products. Have asked the W3C team to speed up finding an alternative name.

Hugo/Yves?: Put into the hands of W3C legal team-> Danny Weitzner.

David F: This is becoming an issues as XP creeps into our documentation. Suggest full use of XML Protocol

Stuart: And for diagrams... get creative.

Ray D: Is delay induced by the sheer number of alternatives we're considering.

Hugo/Yves: probably not.

David F: [Missed]

David F: Will use XML Protocol throughout editors copy of documents, XMLP where not practical, also review of XP usage on Web pages:


8. Volunteers to review I18N Character Model document.

David F: XML Protocol was specifically called out for input by I18N. Need a volunteer to provide WG response by 2/23 . Need volunteers to do this. No response on Email.

Volunteers: David Clay and Ying Lee (??)

David F: Need draft response by next telcon:

David Clay: Should we aim for Monday.

David F: Yes... we'll need it by then so that WG can review response.

ACTION: Ying Ling/David Clay: Draft response to I18N Character Model document by Monday with recommendation to WG.

Paul Cotton: Advice-> there is NO way that the WG can review response without actually having reviewed the Character Model document. Need commitment from the WG to review document  as action to the a substantial part of the WG.

David Clay: Will consult with Paul Cotton

ACTION on WG members to review Character Model document?? [Was this action actually issued]

9. Intermediaries.

Gudge: Presented 3 possible glossary definitions from email [x]. 1st defn direct from Hugo, 2nd defn adds notion of addressing; 3rd makes notion of multiple intermediaries more explicit.


Glen: Would like more definition on what it means to be addressable (or not) from within XML Protocol layer.

Gudge: Don't think XML Protocol can't say anything about things it can't address.

David Burdett: Is it necessary to be able to address all the intermediaries in a message from within a message.

Gudge: Different notions of addressability: direct(?)/classic?, Group, Class... There needs to be something in the message that identifies which intermediary needs to process which bits.


Gudge: Message routing and targetting blocks at different intermediaries are

Mark Nottingham: Targetting and routing are orthogonal.

Noah: Need a clear abstraction about the path and how it is called.

Noah: Need to perhaps ask the Abstract Modellers to think about this and how far we want to go.

Discussion involving Stuart (note taker).... 


David F: Reference to mutual dependencies on other terms.

Gudge: Follow on from from David's comments on targetting and routing -> defined concepts.

David Burdett: That's a good idea.

David Clay: If we go much beyond Martin's description we risk running into defining the role of an intermediary.

Mark Nottingham: Think we need to focus on the role of an intermediary from the point of view of XML Protocol messaging.

Gudge: So which one do folks most comfortable. If we want addressability in there it needs to option #2# or #3

Mark N: Application twaks me a bit

Gudge: Propose we stick with #2 and define addressable.

Ying-Ling: Addressable by?

Gudge: Addressable from within an XMLP Message.

David B: Need to have a definition of addressable.

Marwan: Is addressable in the sense of URI.

Gudge: That's getting a bit of design...

Marwan: It would help me decide.


David Clay: Is an intermediary allowed to change the message... to alter to path requested by the sender.


John: This maybe is something to be worked on within AMG

Gudge: ...we just need a term with a clear enough meaning.

Mark N: There are so many types of intermediary elsewhere in the stack.

Henrik: We have some terms were using in the AMG for things above and below.

Gudge: ...which is why addressability from within the message is so important.


David F: Propose: a) Keep the #2 definition b) define addressability and c) ask AMG to take a position on path models.


10. Usage Scenarios


David F: Deconstruction of DS7

John I: Action was to make some minor modifications and mail to list. Done. Theres been come comments from Nilo to widen scope and from Frank...??

No Frank/Nilo on call.

David F: Insights elsewhere?.... apparently not.

John I: Take DS7 and create some derivatives. Suggest accept DS7 as is and generate more later.

Michah: Concur... the DS's seem much more useful than he'd previously apprciated.

David F: Propose DS7 be advanced to S7 and incorporated in Editors Copy.

Agreed: DONE (Henrik)


Glen: Clarification email sent with examples. Not getting feedback at present. Any comments?

David F: New text?

Glen: No... just clarifiation left the text alone.

David F: Multiple intermediaties on the path or types of intermediaries.

Glen: Meant to encapsulate Multiple intermediaries on the path.

David F: Signature verifying intermeiaries seem to be that they might be another scenario.

Glen: Wanted to get notion of intermediaries that add value in the path and possibly multiple thereof.

David F: Don't hear much discussion... are we happy with it?

Henrik: Need to see the wording again....

Glen: Could certainly clarify the email...

Michah: Are we asserting a correctness criteria for XMLP. Are we required to formulate XML Protocol so that it conforms to all those valuable use cases.

John I: ??

Glen: Really trying to provide some context for sanity checks without requiring developers to bend over backwards.

Michah: So... correctness is something that the intermediary has to take care of and we don't have to deal with the detail (??)

David F: These use cases can be 'larger' than what we will actually provide in XML Protocol. So there may be artifacts in a use case that could be constructed, but that we are not going to provide/define.

Noah: I think there is a danger that everything in a use case becomes a trap. Need to show that some of these things are doable.

Michah: [Missed question]

Noah: In my view, we have a requirements documents... those are our only requirements.


Glen: Supplimentary text is too implementation orientated: agreed... provided rewording of DS807... read out. Tracking extension

Henrik: Are you saying that the person involved needs to see both ends.

Glen: Yes... implictly request response as written.

John I: Issues like this motivated routing header (??) in ebXML.

Gudge: Is it responsibility that all immediaries can understand extension or the sender that it sends message only to intermediaries that do?

Glen: The latter.... ie as in wording

David F: So are we ok with this?

David F: Can we reword on fly... Henrik/Glen?

Glen: Will take to email...

ACTION:  Glen to reword DS807 and send to dist-app and Henrik to be incorporated into editors copy.


Glen: has no details of discussion from last week.


David F: QoS don't have time to eat into this.