Minutes of Transport Binding Task Force, 8 February 2002.

Attendees

Updated Action item list

GD propose text for resolving 33 by EOW
Eds. to identify TBTF to-do's/ed notes in spec, in time for next call
DF to put 178 proposal on WG agenda
HFN to propose text for 103 by CoB today

Status of Email/SMTP binding

-- Published!

Work items

-- spec text
ed. note in Pt1 5.1 POSTPONED, discussion on email
ed. note in Pt2 7.1.6 POSTPONED, follow up after 137 etc
general proof reading and completion of Pt1 sec 5, Pt2 secs 5,6,7

-- issues [3]
33 - POSTPONED until feature/binding
57 - POSTPONED until feature/binding
50 - POSTPONED until feature/binding

178 - ChrisF proposal [
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Feb/0059.html]
TBTF reviewed the proposal and was in general agreement. This text will go
into Part 1, section 5.1.
The participants believe Noah would also be in agreement.
Raj asked (and TBTF agreed) for mention of error handling.
TBTF agreed to a couple minor edits, resulting in the following text:

"Certain features may require end-to-end as opposed to
hop-to-hop processing semantics. While the binding framework
provides for the possibility that such features may be expressed
outside the SOAP envelope, it does not define a specific
architecture for the processing or error handling of these externally
expressed features by a SOAP intermediary. A binding specification
that expresses such features external to the SOAP envelope should
define its own processing rules to which a SOAP node
is expected to conform (for example, describing what information
must be passed along with the SOAP message as it leaves
the intermediary). It is recommended that end-to-end
features should be expressed as SOAP header blocks so that
they may avail themselves of the SOAP processing rules [ref]."

-- 103 still pending
HFN suggests that message path should be synonymous with the one way MEP
HFN will propose text

-- 179
Must every binding support a/the one-way MEP? MH believes every binding
should have to support moving a message from oneplace to another. HFN
believes issue is a historial artefact.
    
Decide date of next TBTF telcon: Wednesday, 13 Feb, 8-9a PST
    
[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/01/23-tbtf
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Jan/0163.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Feb/0048.html