XML Protocol

19 Oct 2005


See also: IRC log


Canon, Herve Ruellan
IBM, Chris Ferris
IBM, Noah Mendelsohn
Nokia, Mike Mahan
Sun Microsystems,Marc Hadley
SeeBeyond (Sun Microsystems), Pete Wenzel
W3C, Yves Lafon
BEA Systems, David Orchard
Oracle, Anish Karmarkar
Iona Technologies, Suresh Kodichath
Microsoft Corporation, Mike Vernal
SAP AG, Volker Wiechers
BEA Systems, Mark Nottingham
Canon, Jean-Jacques Moreau
Microsoft Corporation, Doug Purdy
Oracle, Jeff Mischkinsky
Sun Microsystems, Tony Graham
Mike Mahan
Pete Wenzel

2. Agenda review, scheduling and AOB

AOB: Charter Call for Review

3. Approval of minutes:

Oct 12 minutes postponed

4. Action Items: http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/Admin/#pending

2005/09/14: Mike. Review appendix K and/or L from Voice Browser
Mike: Just started; pending.

2005/10/05: Anish. Respond to his xmlp-comments posting
copying WSA with early word of likely disposition of
optional response in HTTP binding
No report.
2005/10/05: Yves. Create formal issue for optional response in HTTP binding
Yves: Still pending
2005/10/12: Yves. Track W3C logistics planning for TP
Yves: Will have more information next week

2005/10/12: Herve. Send closing email for 36rec.

2005/10/12: Herve. Incorporate resolutions for 34/35/36 into errata
Herve: still pending

5. SOAP 1.2 PER specs

Last week, Yves presented his solution to 33rec and received approval from all present.
Did not close, hoping that MarkN and perhaps Noah could comment.

See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2005Oct/0005.html
Noah: Did not review yet, but don't think it's appropriate to wait for me.
Mike: Do we want to wait another week anyway, and ping MarkN?
Yves: Yes, that would be nice. Should respond to Mark Baker as well.
Noah, Chris: Will take a look at it.
Noah: Not sure MarkB is right, but we should work through the issues before agreeing to close the issue.
Chris: Agree.
Mike will ask MarkN to review as well.
ACTION: Yves to respond to Mark Baker email
ACTION: Mike to explicitly ask MarkN for feedback


6. New SOAP MEP/Binding work item

1. WSA sent some requirements to XMLP.
- MarkN response to clarifying requirements request on behalf of WSA

Chris: They need something quickly; "Timely Delivery" is first requirement.
2. Editors report
Chris: Editors haven't yet reached consensus on course of action. We do agree there's no need for a "SOAP-level" MEP. The question is, do we need this uber-MEP, or do we talk about transport-specific MEPs?
Binding WSDL to transport works fine for HTTP, but not for protocols that are not req-resp in nature-- BEEP, SIP, SMTP, for example. Will resume discussion soon. Think this will take a while to work though.
Not comfortable with editors proposing solution, as there may be push-back from other WG members.

Mike: WG thought editors could propose what they feel is a consensus opinion, since all viewpoints are represented. A deep dive is not expected.

Chris: Would like more validation or direction from WG members.

Noah: Not going to advocate a particular answer, but REC Part 1 talks about MEPs in general, that bindings can implement. We have normative MEPs (req-resp, resp-only); I don't see them as broken, so don't change all the rules, which are settled. Look at existing bindings, see if the proposed changes are compatible.

Mike: Any other input? Suggest editors take another stab at a proposal, then take straw poll for guidance.

Chris: Agree to discuss further and report on status next week. Think Anish will circulate a discussion of the various positions and issues.

ACTION: Editors to prepare a status for next week. Perfer this to first written up as a set of proposal(s) with pros and cons and sent to dist-app

7. AOB

Yves: New charter will go out for review next week, for a minimum of 4 weeks.

No other business; meeting adjourned at 9:00 US/Pacific.