15:00:16 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #xmlprotocol
15:07:15 <DavidF> present marcH, henrik, yves, david, highland, markB, chris, noah
15:07:26 <chris> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Jun/0022.html
15:07:36 <DavidF> agenda+ go thru noah doc
15:08:09 <DavidF> agenda+ responsibilities of a node
15:08:17 <DavidF> agenda+ name of MEP
15:08:23 <Noah> Noah has joined #XMLProtocol
15:08:26 <DavidF> agenda+ status discussion
15:08:50 <DavidF> agenda?
15:10:31 <DavidF> attendees+ jean-jacques
15:10:33 <jjm-lap> jjm-lap has joined #xmlprotocol
15:11:18 <DavidF> agenda+ marcH's issues
15:11:42 <DavidF> agenda 1 marcH's issues (do first)
15:13:37 <DavidF> can we handle them as we go thru the doc?
15:14:05 <DavidF> or are they not location specific in the doc?
15:14:15 <DavidF> agenda=4 marcH's issues (do first)
15:15:39 <DavidF> agenda 5 = marcH's issues (do first)
15:18:34 <DavidF> thnx!
15:21:59 <chris> replace GET, PUT, POST, DELETE with references to definitions in RFC2616
15:22:01 <DavidF> resolved: (sec 6.4) replace GET, PUT etc defns/descriptions with a statement they are defined in HTTP spec
15:24:26 <Ralph> Ralph has joined #xmlprotocol
15:24:41 <DavidF> question re. sec 4.1.1, when carrying info both in URI and msg
15:24:49 <Ralph> Ralph has left #xmlprotocol
15:25:48 <DavidF> mh: questions re. which takes precedence? error handling for each? etc
15:27:04 <DavidCF> DavidCF has joined #xmlprotocol
15:29:26 <chris> q+
15:38:06 <Henrik> replace SHOULD/MAY with could/might etc.
15:38:37 <chris> agreed
15:39:50 <chris> keep examples in gthe primer
15:39:57 <chris> s/gthe/the/
15:40:00 <Henrik> +1
15:42:40 <Henrik> We should a placeholder in the primer for discussing RPC vs. the Web examples
15:45:10 <chris> +1
15:45:53 <Henrik> Suggest saying that "wherever possible, parameters identifying a resource should be encoded in the URI"
15:46:00 <chris> +!
15:46:05 <chris> +1
15:46:25 <DavidF> resolved: add a statement that the spec is not meant to imply that resources be identified to the nth degreee, and there is no specific rule for at what level resources be identified
15:46:29 <chris> s/possible/practical/ ?
15:47:56 <Henrik> ok
15:48:57 <Henrik> Remove the sentence: Such arguments MAY be redundantly carried as method arguments in the SOAP body (see 4.2.1 RPC Invocation.). We should put something to this effect into the primer
15:49:00 <DavidF> resolved: delete "Such arguments MAY be redundantly carried as method arguments in the SOAP body (see 4.2.1 RPC Invocation.) Thus, in the example above, the PartNumber and an indication referencing the QuantityInStock resource SHOULD be encoded in the URI. Either one or two arguments (I.e. either the newQuantity or both the partNumber and the newQuantity) SHOULD be encoded as arguments in the SOAP body. The SOAP 1.2 recommendation (this specification)
15:50:37 <DavidF> resolve: add examples to primer showing use of uri and info in msg
15:50:39 <DavidF> agenda
15:50:42 <DavidF> agenda?
15:51:42 <Henrik> Change "MAY" to "SHOULD" in "Underlying protocols designed for use on the World Wide Web provide for manipulation of resources using a small set of Web methods such as GET, PUT, POST, and DELETE. Bindings to such underlying protocols MAY use the Web Method Specification Feature to give applications control over the Web methods to be used when sending a SOAP message.
15:51:42 <Henrik> "
15:53:56 <Henrik> Drop the forward reference of the MEP "one-way-pull" to the GET stuff in the HTTP binding
15:55:13 <chris> resolved: Drop the forward reference of the MEP "one-way-pull" to the GET stuff in the HTTP binding
15:55:41 <Henrik> With edits, proposal is fine
15:55:55 <chris> +1
15:56:12 <Henrik> if we can get edits in today then we can review tomorrow and talk about it to WG today
15:57:17 <Henrik> Can we get it to the tag EOB tomorrow?
15:58:28 <chris> are we considering edits as the comments (editorial) in the various responses to date (henrik, chris, marc) plus what we resolved today?
15:59:19 <Henrik> ?
15:59:30 <chris> ??
15:59:47 <Henrik> davidf to put together a couple of sentences about what we were thinking and send it around.
16:00:01 <Henrik> chris, I didn't understand your comment?
16:00:30 <chris> what I was trying to understand is what we meant by edits for this round before we make this public
16:00:47 <jjm-lap> noah, I know the XML, but can't help tonight
16:01:03 <Henrik> I can help
16:02:21 <jjm-lap> noah, I've sent some comments as well by email
16:02:41 <Henrik> noah and henrik to go through editorial nits
16:04:29 <jjm-lap> henrik, will you update the stylesheet on Gudge's CVS with Noah's?
16:04:46 <Henrik> think they are the same
16:05:02 <jjm-lap> no, he (at least) changed the green
16:06:45 <Henrik> ok
16:14:56 <Henrik> we will stick with "SOAP response" as name
16:15:13 <Henrik> we will take question about clarification in section 2 to email (which is already the case)
16:15:26 <Henrik> meeting adjourned
16:15:39 <Henrik> rssagent, excuse us
16:15:56 <Henrik> zakim, excuse us
16:15:57 <Zakim> Zakim has left #xmlprotocol
16:17:17 <DavidF> rrsagent, excuse us
19:31:34 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #xmlprotocol
19:32:34 <Yves> zakim, this is XMLP
19:32:35 <Zakim> ok, Yves
19:32:37 <Zakim> +Yves
19:32:45 <Yves> zakim, who is here?
19:32:45 <Zakim> I see +1.781.377.aaaa, ??P1, ??P2, ??P4, +1.949.380.aabb, Fallside, ??P3, ??P7, ??P8, +1.303.791.aacc, Chris.Ferris, +81.72.723.aadd, Yves, ??P13
19:32:53 <JacekK> zakim, ??p13 is probably me
19:32:54 <Zakim> +JacekK?; got it
19:32:56 <Zakim> +??P12
19:33:03 <Yves> it's raining keys on the phone
19:33:04 <JacekK> zakim, mute JacekK temporarily
19:33:05 <Zakim> JacekK? should now be muted
19:33:14 <Zakim> +M.Champion
19:33:20 <Zakim> JacekK? should now be unmuted again
19:33:23 <JacekK> zakim, mute JacekK
19:33:25 <Zakim> JacekK? was already muted, JacekK
19:33:28 <Zakim> + +33.2.23.40.aaee
19:33:28 <Zakim> +Carine
19:34:52 <DavidF> zakim, who is here?
19:34:54 <Zakim> I see +1.781.377.aaaa, ??P1, ??P2, ??P4, +1.949.380.aabb, Fallside, ??P3, ??P7, ??P8, +1.303.791.aacc, Chris.Ferris, +81.72.723.aadd, Yves, JacekK? (muted), ??P12, M.Champion,
19:34:55 <Zakim> ... Carine, +33.2.23.40.aaee
19:35:41 <Zakim> +??P15
19:35:57 <Zakim> + +1.626.428.aaff
19:35:58 <JacekK> zakim, JacekK is really me
19:36:00 <Zakim> +JacekK; got it
19:36:07 <Zakim> +??P18
19:36:15 <Zakim> -??P2
19:36:46 <Zakim> +??P2
19:37:12 <JacekK> zakim, unmute JacekK
19:37:14 <Zakim> JacekK.a should no longer be muted
19:37:44 <JacekK> zakim, mute JacekK
19:37:45 <Zakim> JacekK.a should now be muted
19:38:05 <Zakim> +DMarston
19:39:10 <JacekK> probably same telephone line confusing zakim
19:41:01 <Zakim> -??P1
19:41:03 <Noah> Noah has joined #XMLProtocol
19:41:15 <Zakim> + +1.770.702.aagg
19:41:26 <Zakim> +??P1
19:41:33 <scribe> agenda+ Approval of May 29 telcon minutes [0] (12.40 + 5)
19:41:35 <Noah> I checked with the David Marston who is at IBM...he is not dialed in to Zakim
19:41:45 <scribe> agenda+ Review action items, see [1] (12.45 + 5)
19:41:51 <Zakim> + +1.480.552.aahh
19:41:54 <rayw> rayw has joined #xmlprotocol
19:41:58 <Noah> HFN:  you push the little number buttons
19:42:03 <scribe> agenda+ Status reports. In general, reporters should be able to describe what is
19:42:03 <scribe> still on their to-do lists, and what is their plan for completing those
19:42:03 <scribe> to-do's. (12.50 + 15)
19:42:11 <Henrik> there are so many :(
19:42:28 <scribe> agenda+ GETF report (1.15 + 30)
19:42:43 <scribe> agenda+ Shall we publish the Part 1 and Part 2 documents [2] and [3] as WD's?
19:42:55 <scribe> agenda+ Comments against Test Collection docs (1.45 + 15)
19:43:06 <scribe> agenda+ LC decisions(2.00 + 30)
19:43:27 <scribe> agenda?
19:43:58 <scribe> zakim, agenda?
19:44:00 <Zakim> I see 7 items remaining on the agenda:
19:44:00 <Zakim> 1. Approval of May 29 telcon minutes [0] (12.40 + 5) [from scribe]
19:44:01 <Zakim> 2. Review action items, see [1] (12.45 + 5) [from scribe]
19:44:03 <Zakim> 3. Status reports. In general, reporters should be able to describe what is [from scribe]
19:44:05 <Zakim> 4. GETF report (1.15 + 30) [from scribe]
19:44:06 <Zakim> 5. Shall we publish the Part 1 and Part 2 documents [2] and [3] as WD's? [from scribe]
19:44:07 <Zakim> 6. Comments against Test Collection docs (1.45 + 15) [from scribe]
19:44:08 <Zakim> 7. LC decisions(2.00 + 30) [from scribe]
19:44:25 <scribe> f2f host is Software AG
19:45:19 <scribe> df: thinks that there may be some items in the minutes that should not go out for public consumption. if no objection, Yves and I will take action to remove them
19:45:29 <scribe> df: minutes approved
19:45:30 <camilo> camilo has joined #xmlprotocol
19:45:36 <scribe> agenda -1
19:46:13 <Yves> Editors: DONE
19:46:15 <Yves> Editors: DONE
19:46:38 <Yves> Editors: pending( was first Editors AI)
19:46:42 <Yves> MarkB: Pending
19:46:51 <Yves> Yin Leng & PaulD: DONE
19:47:02 <Yves> Yin Leng: DONE