IRC log of ws-cg on 2003-04-01

Timestamps are in UTC.

[hugo]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
[Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P0
[em]
em has changed the topic to: ws-cg 2003-04-01 teleconference
[hugo]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-cg/2003Apr/0001.html
[em]
zakim, who is here?
[Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P0, +1.408.997.aaaa, Hugo, EMiller, Jonathan_Marsh, Michael
On IRC I see Marsh, MSM, MChapman, RRSAgent, Zakim, em, DavidF, hugo
[hugo]
1. Roll and minutes to be recorded in IRC
Zakim, who's on the phone?
[Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P0, +1.408.997.aaaa, Hugo, EMiller, Jonathan_Marsh, Michael, Mike_Champion
[hugo]
2. Review agenda
From http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-cg/2003Apr/0001.html
JM: agenda+ Travel restrictions
3. Review action items
ACTION: WS WG chairs to poll their members for input to Schema on subset idea [PENDING]
for now
ACTION: WS WG chairs to poll their members for input to XML Core on subset idea [PENDING]
for now
DONE: hugo to draft IG motivation email for use by WS WG chairs
DONE: WS WG chairs to informa members of upcoming IG BOF meeting during All Group week
possible action re glossary
see previous minutes
-----
4. Reports from other CGs:
-----
10. Travel restrictions
[DavidF]
(new agenda item)
[hugo]
JM: concerns in WGs
... 3 companies will not be able to travel internationally, 1 cannot travel at all
... Canon may postpone but need to be told in the next 2 weeks
[DavidF]
... these numbers from WSD, similar numbers from WSArch
ACTION: hugo to look into registration numbers for AC meeting
note that we should continue to track this
[hugo]
MC: we need good Internet connectivity
-----
5. How/when to connect WSDL with OWL?
See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-cg/2003Mar/0007.html
EM: WebOnt LC before EOW
... Web Services Activity sollicited
[DavidF]
so heads up to WS WG chairs!
[hugo]
s/sollicited/solicited/
... if there is going to be some OWL work upcoming at a f2f, please tell us so
JM: not yet; I am concerned about resources on this
... and on other things too
DF: same problem in XMLPWG; I had assumed that it was because people were spending their time in other groups
JM: worried that we will approve an RDF mapping which will not be well reviewed
[DavidF]
actually, i had assumed it was a time-based fatigue and not so much because people spending time in other groups
i.e. the newer WGs would suffer less
[hugo]
JM: is there anything we can do in addition to forwarding the LC announcement and request for comments to the WG?
[ discussion about how to do the RDF mapping and how to know whether the WSDL sperification is semantically sound in order to do so ]
JM: people outside the WG could produce a mapping and show it to the WSDWG if they are successful, and tell us where there is a problem if there is one
[DavidF]
-----
[Marsh]
ACTION: Jonathan to craft a proposal to better ensure appropriate resources are available to accomplish the RDF-WSDL mapping.
[DavidF]
6. Update on the creation of an IG
[em]
Marsh, I think what Hugo is discussing now wrt Semantic Web Services IG may be such a forum that can be leveraged to help with your action
[Marsh]
I agree.
[DavidF]
w3t leaning towards general sweb ig with a web svcs subgroup
MC: current ML doesn't seem to have enough traffic to warrant another ML
this IG is broader in scope than IG's historically .... w3t talking about how deal with IP with a IG creating docs ....
ACTION: hugo to create and present IG proposal in time for next WSCG telcon
-----
7. WSArch question: how to coordinate the various approaches to defining
properties and features in SOAP?
MC: notes joint TF exists between WSArch and WSD, and they have done some preliminary 'PRwork'
JM: thinks that properties and features will not gain traction in market
.... it was perhaps over-extended by WS as applied above and beyond bindings
... the ball is in WSA's court
[em]
DavidF, i'm going to have to run now as I have another meeting
[DavidF]
----
8. XMLP WG and WS-I and attachments, sgould anything be done to encourage
convergence?
[hugo]
JM: WS-I working on attachments and security profile
... my concern is that there is still a lot of work to do in the XMLPWG on attachments
... the WS-I group is not working as closely with W3C decisions as it did with SOAP and WSDL
DF: there is strong market desire; part of the discussion in the XMLPWG is whether to do something right now or later
MChapman: can be addressed with the formal liaison
[DavidF]
don't dismiss zakim/rss yet
[Zakim]
WS_WSCG()1:00PM has ended
[hugo]
ACTION: Hugo to talk to DavidF to get up-to-date on attachment situation
ACTION: Hugo to talk to WS-I contact about attachment work
Zakim, please excuse us
RRSAgent, please excuse us
[RRSAgent]
I see 7 open action items:
ACTION: WS WG chairs to poll their members for input to Schema on subset idea [PENDING] [1]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-cg-irc#T18-09-47
ACTION: WS WG chairs to poll their members for input to XML Core on subset idea [PENDING] [2]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-cg-irc#T18-10-15
ACTION: hugo to look into registration numbers for AC meeting [3]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-cg-irc#T18-29-11
ACTION: Jonathan to craft a proposal to better ensure appropriate resources are available to accomplish the RDF-WSDL mapping. [4]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-cg-irc#T18-45-10
ACTION: hugo to create and present IG proposal in time for next WSCG telcon [5]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-cg-irc#T18-54-28
ACTION: Hugo to talk to DavidF to get up-to-date on attachment situation [6]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-cg-irc#T19-10-25
ACTION: Hugo to talk to WS-I contact about attachment work [7]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-cg-irc#T19-10-45