IRC log of ws-arch on 2002-06-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:19:41 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-arch
19:19:52 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-arch
19:20:23 [cgi-irc]
cgi-irc has joined #ws-arch
19:22:51 [cgi-irc]
bye
19:23:05 [cgi-irc]
quit
19:23:33 [chrisf]
agenda+ Roll call, scribes for minutes/action items (15.30 + 5)
19:23:33 [chrisf]
agenda+ Agenda review, and AOB (15.35 + 5)
19:23:33 [chrisf]
agenda+ No minutes to approve (15.40 + 0)
19:23:49 [chrisf]
agenda+ Review action items [none] (15.40 + 0)
19:23:49 [chrisf]
agenda+ Status (15.40 + 10)
19:23:49 [chrisf]
agenda+ Review of progress made at F2F (15.50 + 10)
19:23:49 [chrisf]
agenda+ Review RTF proposals for Requirements doc changes related to Team goal (16.00 + 15)
19:23:49 [chrisf]
agenda+ Review RTF D-AC018 [5] (16.15 + 15)
19:23:51 [chrisf]
agenda+ Proposal for D-AC005.5 - 8 (16.30 + 5)
19:23:53 [chrisf]
agenda+ Next steps and task assignments (16.35 + 20)
19:23:53 [chrisf]
agenda+ Wrap-up (16.55 + 5)
19:24:10 [joe]
joe has joined #WS-ARCH
19:24:20 [hpsteiert]
hpsteiert has joined #ws-arch
19:24:54 [frankmcca]
chris: I'd like to schedule some time to discuss my various goals that I posted.
19:25:26 [chrisf]
okay, we'll see if there's time, otherwise next week I'll add it to the agenda
19:25:32 [chrisf]
k?
19:25:55 [frankmcca]
that's ok
19:27:04 [Mark_J]
chris, when will the f2f minutes be available? I a bit lost in some email threads without them.
19:28:06 [AlanD]
AlanD has joined #ws-arch
19:28:12 [chrisf]
hugo and I were cleaning them up this morning. they should be posted soon.
19:28:48 [TimJones]
TimJones has joined #ws-arch
19:30:43 [chrisf]
zakim, this is arch
19:30:44 [Zakim]
ok, chrisf
19:30:52 [Zakim]
+Chris_Ferris
19:31:01 [tomCarrol]
tomCarrol has joined #ws-arch
19:31:05 [Zakim]
+Hugo
19:31:10 [igors]
igors has joined #ws-arch
19:31:24 [Zakim]
+??P17
19:31:29 [Zakim]
+ +1.919.488.aacc
19:31:35 [Zakim]
+DavidB
19:31:41 [Zakim]
+??P20
19:32:08 [Zakim]
-??P20
19:32:13 [Zakim]
+MikeM
19:32:35 [Daniel]
Daniel has joined #ws-arch
19:32:38 [MikeM]
MikeM has joined #ws-arch
19:32:53 [Zakim]
+??P20
19:32:56 [Zakim]
+??P24
19:32:57 [Zakim]
+Prasad_Yendluri
19:33:44 [Zakim]
+??P25
19:33:45 [Zakim]
+PaulD
19:34:44 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.229.aadd
19:35:03 [MartinC]
MartinC has joined #ws-arch
19:35:09 [Zakim]
+??P1
19:35:30 [Zakim]
+DOrchard
19:35:43 [Zakim]
+ +1.412.268.aaee
19:35:44 [Zakim]
+??P3
19:35:58 [JimD]
JimD has joined #ws-arch
19:36:11 [JimD]
Jim Davenport here from MITRE
19:36:22 [JimD]
I cannot seem to dial in right now
19:37:28 [Zakim]
+??P27
19:38:46 [Zakim]
+??P28
19:39:07 [Zakim]
+??P29
19:39:13 [Zakim]
+??P30
19:39:53 [Kreger]
Kreger has joined #ws-arch
19:40:39 [AllenBr]
AllenBr has joined #ws-arch
19:40:52 [chrisf]
agenda?
19:41:32 [hugo]
Zakim, what is the agenda?
19:41:33 [Zakim]
I see 11 items remaining on the agenda:
19:41:34 [Zakim]
1. Roll call, scribes for minutes/action items (15.30 + 5) [from chrisf]
19:41:35 [Zakim]
2. Agenda review, and AOB (15.35 + 5) [from chrisf]
19:41:37 [Zakim]
3. No minutes to approve (15.40 + 0) [from chrisf]
19:41:39 [Zakim]
4. Review action items [none] (15.40 + 0) [from chrisf]
19:41:42 [Zakim]
5. Status (15.40 + 10) [from chrisf]
19:41:43 [Zakim]
6. Review of progress made at F2F (15.50 + 10) [from chrisf]
19:41:44 [Zakim]
7. Review RTF proposals for Requirements doc changes related to Team goal (16.00 + 15) [from chrisf]
19:41:46 [Zakim]
8. Review RTF D-AC018 [5] (16.15 + 15) [from chrisf]
19:41:48 [Zakim]
9. Proposal for D-AC005.5 - 8 (16.30 + 5) [from chrisf]
19:41:49 [Zakim]
10. Next steps and task assignments (16.35 + 20) [from chrisf]
19:41:49 [Zakim]
11. Wrap-up (16.55 + 5) [from chrisf]
19:42:00 [Zakim]
+ +1.650.599.aaff - is perhaps ScottV?
19:42:42 [Kreger]
well thanks Dave! I need more gold stars!
19:43:14 [Kreger]
dave... how do you make it put the msg out with an * like that?
19:43:19 [jeffm]
jeffm has joined #WS-Arch
19:44:57 [hugo]
-----
19:45:01 [Daniel]
Daniel = scribe
19:45:04 [hugo]
1. Roll call, scribes for minutes/action items (15.30 + 5)
19:45:14 [hugo]
-----
19:45:18 [Daniel]
Chris goes over agenda
19:45:33 [Daniel]
item 3 minutes
19:45:54 [hugo]
F2F minutes to review: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/06/f2f-minutes
19:45:57 [Daniel]
Hugo working on minutes, will post URL on IRC, will be approved next week in call
19:46:08 [frankmcca]
Aims & Objectives URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Jun/0093.html
19:46:08 [Daniel]
item 4 - no outstanding AIs
19:46:52 [Daniel]
item 5 status: editors call report:
19:47:19 [Daniel]
few attendees, working on usage scenarios document
19:47:32 [Daniel]
terminology: use thingies suggested
19:47:56 [Zakim]
+MarkB
19:47:56 [Daniel]
Chris asks Hugo about posting of use cases
19:48:17 [Daniel]
Hugo: modified travel use case, integrated with Roger's EDS use case
19:48:30 [Daniel]
will post to list, link from homepage
19:48:35 [Daniel]
David O will review
19:48:55 [hugo]
ACTION: Hugo to publish his updated version of the use thingy doc
19:49:40 [Daniel]
RTF report: team lead reports, working on 7, 18, 19
19:49:49 [Daniel]
will send reworked #7 to list for review
19:49:59 [Daniel]
nest week will work on #18, 19
19:50:05 [Daniel]
nest - next
19:50:23 [Daniel]
CHris: will cover later in agenda also
19:50:45 [Daniel]
agenda item 7
19:51:09 [Daniel]
actually, item #6, review of f2f results
19:51:31 [Daniel]
Chris: meeting was partially successful, lot of progress, could be more
19:51:42 [Daniel]
many proposals were resolved
19:51:57 [Daniel]
CHris has made the changes to the reqs doc, will post today
19:52:15 [Daniel]
David O presented basic Arch Document, much discussion at f2f
19:52:20 [Daniel]
more work needed
19:53:04 [Daniel]
Chris will propose additional task forces to work on parts of this
19:53:28 [Daniel]
esp. architectural aspects of existing specs need to be harvested
19:53:38 [Zakim]
-??P24
19:54:00 [Daniel]
binding, MEP, cross-functional requirements added to list
19:54:11 [Daniel]
Katia: cross reference must be consistent
19:54:22 [Daniel]
CHris: glossary presentation by Allen Brown
19:54:32 [Daniel]
discussion of glossary organization
19:54:43 [Daniel]
Allen will continue to work on this
19:55:09 [Daniel]
Chris: Use cases were also reviewed, both travel and EDI use thingies were reviewed
19:55:22 [Daniel]
security aspects were discussed in detail
19:55:42 [Daniel]
confidentiality, data integrity, authentication
19:56:07 [Daniel]
this discussion ended when we reached the limits of the current architectural understanding
19:56:48 [Daniel]
decision was made to split efforts to flesh parts out, parallel efforts to maximize resources and speed process
19:57:19 [Daniel]
agenda item 7: review of RTF proposal addressing DAG002
19:57:39 [Daniel]
should some of these be moved to team goals?
19:57:56 [Daniel]
refactoring options discussion
19:58:08 [Daniel]
CHris: hopefully everyone has looked at this
19:58:20 [Daniel]
Suresh leads conversation
19:58:37 [Daniel]
the first proposal is to move DAG007 over to team goals
19:58:47 [Daniel]
let's talk about this first, then the rest
19:59:09 [Daniel]
DAG007 says the ref architecture must be reliable and stable over time
19:59:27 [Daniel]
Daniel sez: where do you want to move it?
20:00:04 [Daniel]
Chris: asks group how to proceed with this proposal: serially or as a whole?
20:00:19 [Daniel]
Suresh starts with 7.1 - relaible
20:00:25 [Daniel]
7.2 stable over time
20:00:53 [Daniel]
7.1.1 precise definition of architecture, no opaque jargon
20:01:18 [Daniel]
Frank M. asks if we use plain English or UML or what?
20:01:34 [Daniel]
Suresh sez the doc doesn't say, intentionally ambigous
20:02:06 [Daniel]
Frank M: do we think it should be in English?
20:02:17 [Daniel]
Suresh: thinks it should be ambigous
20:02:27 [Daniel]
Daniel agrees, even while typing
20:02:54 [Daniel]
Chris notes we shoud try not obfuscate the text too much
20:03:08 [Daniel]
make sure we define terms as much as possible
20:03:22 [Daniel]
7.2 - stability and evolution
20:03:33 [DaveO]
DaveO has joined #ws-arch
20:03:34 [Daniel]
7.2.1 - stable conceptual model
20:03:56 [Daniel]
7.2.2 WSA defined by well-defined policy
20:04:17 [Daniel]
7.2.3 new versions of WSA should be backwards compatible
20:04:30 [Daniel]
7.2.4 changes are well-defined
20:05:09 [dbooth]
Daniel: I was worried about 7.2.3. I've worked on a lot of software projects that required it, and I've worried about it.
20:05:18 [dbooth]
Zulah: We had this discussion and the "should" came up.
20:05:29 [Kreger]
unarbitrarily???
20:05:36 [Daniel]
LOL that is not a word
20:05:45 [Daniel]
Dave thanks, I am back as scribe
20:05:48 [dbooth]
ok
20:05:53 [Daniel]
much gracias
20:06:15 [Daniel]
Suresh, Katia argue over compatibility
20:06:23 [DaveO]
zakim, who's here?
20:06:26 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Mark_A_Jones, GlenD, ??P7, +1.408.732.aaaa, Tim_Jones, ??P10, ??P9, +1.972.459.aabb, Joseph_Hui, Igor_Sedukhin, Chris_Ferris, Hugo, ??P17, +1.919.488.aacc,
20:06:26 [Zakim]
... DavidB, MikeM, ??P20, Prasad_Yendluri, ??P25, PaulD, +1.415.229.aadd, ??P1, DOrchard, +1.412.268.aaee, ??P3, Henrik?, ??P28, ??P29, ??P30, ScottV?, MarkB
20:06:27 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DaveO, jeffm, AllenBr, Kreger, JimD, MartinC, MikeM, Daniel, igors, TC, TimJones, joe, Zakim, RRSAgent, chrisf, frankmcca, MarkB, Mark_J, Henrik, dbooth, hugo
20:06:28 [Daniel]
Daniel will accept 7.2.3 so long as it says "should"
20:06:34 [Zakim]
+??P43
20:06:35 [DaveO]
zakim, mute me
20:06:37 [Zakim]
sorry, DaveO, I do not see a party named 'DaveO'
20:06:52 [DaveO]
zakim, mute dorchard
20:06:53 [Zakim]
DOrchard should now be muted
20:07:33 [Kreger]
I can buy that
20:07:38 [Daniel]
paul Denning sez: 7.2.3.1 is superflous
20:07:57 [Daniel]
SUresh: that one applies specifically to changes, not the same as 7.2.1
20:08:07 [Zakim]
-ScottV?
20:08:32 [Daniel]
Suresh: does the group agree?
20:08:40 [Daniel]
No complaints from the ppl
20:09:06 [Daniel]
Mike M. sez: 7.2.1 may be superflous also
20:09:10 [chrisf]
resolved: remove: , and the
20:09:11 [chrisf]
changed Web Service Architecture is reliable
20:09:14 [Daniel]
Suresh: I adont agree
20:09:25 [chrisf]
from d-ac007.2.3.1
20:09:41 [Daniel]
Katia: makes point about 7.2.3.1
20:09:46 [Daniel]
Chris clarifies
20:10:00 [Daniel]
they could be merged but its worth preserving the distinction
20:10:07 [Daniel]
CHris: other comments?
20:10:33 [Daniel]
Joe Hui: at a higher level, "evolvable over time"?
20:10:49 [Daniel]
Joe: should we add this?
20:11:10 [Daniel]
Suresh: stable changes lead to evolution, not really needed
20:11:19 [Daniel]
q+
20:11:40 [Daniel]
Suresh says it was removed because it is mentioned elsewhere
20:11:57 [Daniel]
Joe argues that his point is different
20:12:05 [Daniel]
wants to add evolvable to 7.2.2
20:12:18 [Daniel]
CHris: let's get closure w/o adding things
20:12:30 [Daniel]
Please send your change requests to the list
20:12:49 [Daniel]
Can we be confortable with the existing text? what do we think?
20:12:56 [Daniel]
Frank M asks about 7.2.2
20:13:09 [Daniel]
Frank: does it refere to the arch or the documents or the components or what?
20:13:23 [Daniel]
SUresh: all of the above
20:13:44 [Daniel]
Suresh: do we agree?
20:13:55 [Daniel]
Dbooth suggests we should clarify the text
20:14:23 [Daniel]
Frank supports idea, but it needs further elaboration, describes as "minefield"
20:14:26 [joe]
Joe'd like to see the notion of an "evolutionary roadmap" reflected in 7.2.2.
20:14:31 [Zakim]
-GlenD
20:14:47 [Daniel]
Frank: versioning is a difficult task fraught with error and controversy
20:15:11 [Daniel]
Chris clrifies the versioning
20:15:29 [Daniel]
Frank: how does versioning work? incrementing?
20:15:50 [Zakim]
+??P6
20:15:53 [Daniel]
Frank we need a versioning policy
20:16:23 [Daniel]
Chris: agrees we need to spend more time on this
20:16:41 [Zakim]
-Prasad_Yendluri
20:17:16 [dbooth]
Daniel: What i intended was the arch must be reliable, stable, but there is a path for it to grow. I did not mean easily understood.
20:17:38 [dbooth]
Katya: But now we're talking about it pertaining to the document, so "reliable" is a confusing term.
20:17:39 [Daniel]
Daniel talks about intent of goal 7, meaning of relaible is "predictable behaviour
20:17:48 [Daniel]
Thx Dave!
20:18:00 [DaveO]
zakim, unmute dorchard
20:18:01 [Zakim]
DOrchard should no longer be muted
20:18:01 [Daniel]
Suresh: agrees with reliable term
20:18:07 [DaveO]
q+
20:18:36 [Daniel]
Katia: confusing reliable with well-defined
20:18:40 [Daniel]
q-
20:19:08 [Daniel]
Katia sez well-defined is different and should be included, thinks text is confusing
20:19:21 [chrisf]
ack daveo
20:19:29 [Daniel]
David O suggests that this go to the mailing list
20:19:55 [Daniel]
Chris: hmmm maybe we can get closure on at least some things, ie the intent rather than text
20:20:01 [Daniel]
Chris: objections?
20:20:05 [Daniel]
no objections
20:20:30 [Daniel]
editors take action item to fix DAG007 as per group agreement
20:20:45 [Daniel]
now on DAC008.6
20:20:55 [Daniel]
Ooops
20:20:56 [hugo]
ACTION: Editors to include new version of D-AC007 with modifications agreed on the call
20:21:27 [dbooth]
Daniel: 007 was originally intended to refer to the arch, not the team.
20:21:45 [Daniel]
Katia: doesn't agree
20:22:01 [Daniel]
on to 8.6 - use of components must be consistent w/in architecture
20:22:18 [Daniel]
Katia: suggests it might be moved
20:22:51 [Daniel]
Daniel notes that this applies to both the arch and doc, and that this was intentional on the part of the editors
20:22:57 [Daniel]
Katia suggests rewording:
20:23:05 [chrisf]
The definition and use of the components is consistent
20:23:05 [chrisf]
within the Web Service Architecture
20:23:13 [chrisf]
and the architecture document itself
20:23:26 [Daniel]
CHris: hears no objection, so moved
20:23:31 [Daniel]
moving on 12.7
20:23:43 [hugo]
ACTION: Editors to include new version of D-AC008.6
20:23:50 [Daniel]
12.7 sez architecture must be validated against use thingies
20:24:08 [Daniel]
does the group agree?
20:24:22 [hugo]
ACTION: Editors to include new version of D-AC012.7
20:24:23 [Daniel]
Chris: this si approved
20:24:44 [Daniel]
ag 5.3 - unique components
20:25:05 [Daniel]
Chris goes over items 5.x, asks for comments
20:25:13 [Daniel]
Chris: objections?
20:25:20 [hugo]
ACTION: Editors to include new version of D-AC005.3
20:25:27 [Daniel]
CHris hears no objections, editors will do it
20:25:51 [hugo]
ACTION: Editors to mark D-AC005.3 as approved AC005.3
20:25:56 [Daniel]
CHris: skipping agenda item 8, RTF needs more time to cogitate on this one
20:26:25 [Daniel]
CHris: tortures group with high pitched noise as he changes telephones
20:26:42 [Daniel]
Chris: on to agenda item 9
20:27:09 [Daniel]
rrevision for DAC 5.5-8
20:27:30 [Daniel]
Frank M: what about mgmt? this is a black hole...is mgmt out of scope?
20:27:37 [Daniel]
Chris: discuss on the list
20:27:51 [Daniel]
Frank have we discussed this before?
20:27:56 [Daniel]
CHris: not on the call
20:28:27 [Daniel]
CHris ( on item 9) 5.5-8 revision suggested by Srinivas, text is recast
20:28:43 [Daniel]
Chris reads proposed text
20:29:08 [Daniel]
Mark B. sez: there was something on the list about this
20:29:20 [Daniel]
mark: actually that was 5.6 sorry
20:29:31 [Daniel]
Chris: do we adopt the revisions?
20:29:43 [DaveO]
zakim, mute dorchard
20:29:45 [Daniel]
CHris: no objections, editors are tasked with fixing it
20:29:46 [Zakim]
DOrchard should now be muted
20:29:59 [Daniel]
Chris: on to agenda item #10
20:30:00 [hugo]
ACTION: Editors to change and mark as accepted: D-AC005.[56]
20:30:03 [DaveO]
sigh..
20:30:09 [Daniel]
Chris recaps what happened at the f2f on this issue
20:30:10 [DaveO]
zakim, unmute dorchard
20:30:11 [Zakim]
DOrchard should no longer be muted
20:30:40 [Daniel]
CHris: I had hoped to draft what might constitute scope of security WG proposal
20:31:05 [Daniel]
Chris: we worked on this but did not achieve closure, based on Joe Hui's "onion" proposal
20:31:09 [Daniel]
(see f2f notes)
20:31:42 [Daniel]
Chris: suggestion that we might focus on end to end security also, possibly at the message level
20:31:59 [Daniel]
CHris: requires digital signing of SOAP msgs, credentialing
20:32:25 [Daniel]
Chris: when we got to the point of setting pen to paper, we broke out into broader discussion
20:32:50 [Daniel]
Chris: of need for more clear arch def before security WG can be proposed
20:33:13 [Daniel]
CHris: futher discussion was about arch model for WS...suggestion was that we would
20:33:30 [Daniel]
Chris: harvest assumptions and ideas from existing WS specs
20:33:48 [Daniel]
and then set up a subteam to do the harvesting
20:34:11 [Daniel]
members should be familiar with WSDL and/or SOAP
20:34:23 [Daniel]
David O: is that an or or or both
20:34:27 [Daniel]
Chris: and/or
20:34:34 [Daniel]
CHris: need a small group
20:35:03 [Daniel]
Chris: also a 2nd subgoup working on security use thingies
20:35:22 [Daniel]
Chris: based on dissecting Hugo's travel use thingy
20:35:28 [Daniel]
q+
20:35:53 [Daniel]
Chris: talks about short time frame 3-4 weeks
20:36:31 [Daniel]
CHris: calls for volunteers, 3-4 ppl per group to progress in short time
20:37:05 [Daniel]
Mark Baker: under the impression that harvesting would look at running code as source for arch principles
20:37:19 [Daniel]
Mark B: better approach that harvesting other specs
20:37:27 [Daniel]
Mark: what do you think?
20:37:46 [Daniel]
CHris: you mean the web?
20:38:02 [Daniel]
Mark: better source than specs, which are very general
20:38:08 [Daniel]
Katia: what is the point?
20:38:23 [Daniel]
Katia: harvest from *what* running code?
20:38:43 [Daniel]
David O: Mark may be suggesting looking at a wide range of code
20:38:59 [Daniel]
Mark: experience shows that running code is best soruce
20:39:07 [TC]
q?
20:39:17 [Daniel]
Paul D: are you thinking about deployment descriptors etc?
20:39:43 [Daniel]
Mark: not sure about that...more about interactions between existing components as model for architecture
20:40:19 [Daniel]
David O: one of the reasons for harvesting was from Glen D., instead of proposing conceptual model,
20:40:41 [Daniel]
we should start from the group up with components exchanging infosets
20:41:03 [Daniel]
and then talk about how this might be extended with more features, etc.
20:41:21 [Daniel]
WSDL proviedes an abstract model of these intractions might take place
20:41:29 [Daniel]
David O likes this idea
20:41:48 [Daniel]
iteratively adding more refinements
20:42:17 [Daniel]
opposes Daniel's top-down suggestion at previous f2f
20:42:40 [Daniel]
Katia: doesn't object to Dave's proposal, but notes that this leads to feature creep in the description
20:42:59 [Daniel]
David O: WSDL supports 4 types of msgs...is that what you mean?
20:43:12 [Daniel]
Katia: there are other things too
20:43:46 [Daniel]
David interrupts: the point is that the reality of these specs have lots of architecture in them
20:44:13 [Daniel]
David: we should gather all of that up and then work on it
20:44:32 [Daniel]
Chris: this is useful for consistency
20:44:43 [Daniel]
David: what? we need consistency? Ha!
20:44:54 [Daniel]
Chris: that would be nice...
20:45:11 [Daniel]
CHris: one can think of features that should be defined unambigously and consistently
20:45:30 [Daniel]
CHris: and we need to take these things into accoutn when we work on the arch
20:46:45 [Daniel]
Chris: we can consider alternate sources of desription, but we have to deal with what is already done
20:46:52 [Daniel]
regardless of the impact
20:47:04 [Daniel]
mark doesn't agree
20:47:19 [Daniel]
Daniel doesn't agree with Dave, agrees with Mark
20:47:40 [Daniel]
David O: makes distinction about harvesting, helps to identify gaps
20:48:13 [Daniel]
mark: notes basic assumption that we all know about SOAP and WSDL
20:48:32 [Daniel]
David O: ppl were unconfy with features of SOAP and WSDL
20:48:54 [jeffm]
Regrets - I need to drop off, see y'all next week
20:48:58 [Daniel]
David O: points out that most of the arch is already done, we just need to harvest
20:49:13 [Daniel]
Suresh: likes David's approach
20:49:28 [Daniel]
has one question: is the part from the other specs normative?
20:49:33 [Daniel]
Chris: normative?
20:49:52 [Daniel]
Daniel: this means we are stuck with SOAP and WSDL
20:50:17 [Daniel]
Scribe: correction: David O said "normative" not CHris F.
20:50:31 [Daniel]
Katia: aska about meaning of normative
20:51:01 [Daniel]
David O: SOAP must be extended to be used, so extensibility is key
20:51:19 [Daniel]
Suresh: which version of SOAP 1.1?
20:51:25 [Daniel]
Chris: SOAP 1.2
20:52:03 [Zakim]
-??P28
20:52:12 [Daniel]
Chris: normative defn is diff in this group than normal W3C
20:52:31 [Daniel]
David O: can you pass on the reference to SOAP attachments?
20:52:46 [Daniel]
Suresh: question about infosets
20:52:57 [Daniel]
Chris: we can discuss that later
20:53:07 [Zakim]
-??P6
20:53:10 [Daniel]
Chris: wrapping up, asks for volunteers for these two subgroups
20:53:20 [Daniel]
Chris: note short timelines
20:53:42 [Daniel]
Chris: work will start asap
20:54:08 [Daniel]
CHris: sez that previous volunteers fro the f3f should volunteer again
20:54:25 [Daniel]
Joe Hui: wonders if CHris would state scope of volunteer work
20:54:30 [Zakim]
-??P1
20:54:39 [Zakim]
-??P30
20:54:42 [Daniel]
Chris: after the useage thingies work is done yes
20:54:48 [Daniel]
Joe: what is the overall scope?
20:55:00 [Daniel]
CHris: will send in an email
20:55:15 [Zakim]
-??P7
20:55:27 [MarkB]
i have to leave too. later all.
20:55:28 [Daniel]
bye for now, I have another meeting
20:55:32 [Zakim]
-MarkB
20:55:39 [dbooth]
FrankMcC: I sent out some additional goals/requirements.
20:55:55 [dbooth]
... I'd like to find a way to get the process in place to address them.
20:56:22 [chrisf]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Jun/0093.html
20:56:22 [chrisf]
[15:45] <Daniel> item 4 - no outstanding AIs
20:57:15 [dbooth]
... The background for this is that they come from our experience in doing agents.
20:57:27 [dbooth]
... An agent is like a use case for people doing Web Services.
20:57:42 [dbooth]
... And from doing Agent interop stds also.
20:58:01 [dbooth]
Katya: And also they represent how WEb Services may evolve in the future.
20:58:14 [dbooth]
... Rather than just one-shot "get the stock quote" examples.
20:58:26 [dbooth]
... In reality you have multi-party interactions and more complicated services.
20:58:51 [dbooth]
FrankMcC: If WS are going to be deployed by businesses, they need to address std business needs.
20:59:06 [dbooth]
... These goals are enable techynologies to meet those needs.
20:59:11 [dbooth]
Katya: Yes.
20:59:29 [dbooth]
FrankMcC: I'd like to put a process into place for addressing these.
21:00:16 [dbooth]
Chris: That is part of our process.
21:00:29 [MikeM]
i must leave.
21:00:35 [Zakim]
-MikeM
21:01:15 [dbooth]
Chris: Just keep championing them on the list and try to bring them toward consensus or capture the sense of what people think.
21:01:38 [dbooth]
Chris: No teleconference call on July 4th.
21:02:34 [dbooth]
Chris: Re: Usage Scenarios, DaveH is not on the call, and my phone battery is dying, so could someone volunteer to chair the call?
21:02:50 [Zakim]
- +1.408.732.aaaa
21:03:05 [Zakim]
-??P9
21:03:08 [dbooth]
MarkH: I'll hang out for the call.
21:03:23 [dbooth]
(A few others also said they would)
21:03:27 [Zakim]
-Mark_A_Jones
21:03:29 [dbooth]
zakim, please propose a chair
21:03:30 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'please propose a chair', dbooth. Try /msg Zakim help
21:03:40 [Zakim]
-??P20
21:03:52 [dbooth]
Hao: I'll chair.
21:03:57 [Zakim]
-Joseph_Hui
21:03:57 [Zakim]
-Tim_Jones
21:03:58 [Zakim]
-??P10
21:03:58 [TC]
TC has left #ws-arch
21:04:00 [Zakim]
-??P17
21:04:02 [Zakim]
-Hugo
21:04:16 [dbooth]
[Meeting adjourned]
21:04:17 [Zakim]
-??P29
21:04:27 [Zakim]
-Henrik?
21:04:28 [Zakim]
- +1.919.488.aacc
21:04:49 [TimJones]
TimJones has left #ws-arch
21:05:28 [Zakim]
- +1.972.459.aabb
21:05:36 [Zakim]
-DavidB
21:05:46 [dbooth]
rrsagent, where am i?
21:05:46 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2002/06/20-ws-arch-irc#T21-05-46
21:06:07 [chrisf]
rrsagent, actions?
21:06:07 [chrisf]
I'm logging. Sorry, nothing found for 'actions'
21:07:00 [hugo]
RRSAgent, what actions?
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
I see 7 action items:
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Hugo to publish his updated version of the use thingy doc [1]
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/20-ws-arch-irc#T19-48-55
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Editors to include new version of D-AC007 with modifications agreed on the call [2]
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/20-ws-arch-irc#T20-20-56
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Editors to include new version of D-AC008.6 [3]
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/20-ws-arch-irc#T20-23-43
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Editors to include new version of D-AC012.7 [4]
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/20-ws-arch-irc#T20-24-22
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Editors to include new version of D-AC005.3 [5]
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/20-ws-arch-irc#T20-25-20
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Editors to mark D-AC005.3 as approved AC005.3 [6]
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/20-ws-arch-irc#T20-25-51
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Editors to change and mark as accepted: D-AC005.[56] [7]
21:07:01 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/20-ws-arch-irc#T20-30-00
21:08:03 [Zakim]
-??P25
21:08:57 [Zakim]
-Chris_Ferris
21:11:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.919.496.aagg
21:17:37 [MartinC]
q+
21:22:47 [Zakim]
-??P3
21:31:33 [Zakim]
-??P43
21:31:34 [Zakim]
-DOrchard
21:31:36 [Zakim]
-Igor_Sedukhin
21:31:38 [Zakim]
- +1.412.268.aaee
21:31:38 [Zakim]
- +1.415.229.aadd
21:31:39 [Zakim]
- +1.919.496.aagg
21:31:40 [Zakim]
-PaulD
21:31:40 [Zakim]
WS_ArchWG()3:30PM has ended
21:48:20 [MartinC]
MartinC has left #ws-arch
23:58:49 [AlanD]
AlanD has joined #ws-arch