Minutes WS Choreography WG conference call 11 January 2005
Roll Call
=======
Tony Fletcher (Choreology), Steve Ross-Talbot (Co-Chair - Enigmatec), Gary Brown (Enigmatec), Greg Ritzinger (Novell - IRC only), Abbie Barbir (Nortel), Martin Chapman (Co-Chair - Oracle), Monica Martin (Sun), Charlton Barreto (webMethods), Yves Lafon (W3C staff).
Regrets: Nickolas Kavantzas (Oracle)
Admin
=====
irc log at http://www.w3.org/2005/01/11-ws-chor-irc
Scribe: Tony agreed to scribe.
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Jan/att-0023/Agenda20050111-0.txt
Minutes
======
Approved minutes for 4th January 2005 teleconference
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2005Jan/att-0001/MeetingMinutes20050104-0.txt
Actions
======
1) Chairs to make exit and implementation criteria proposal for the group.
IN PROGRESS
2) Charlton to check that this has been done: Change bullet on WSDL Rationale: Web Service descriptions only describe an aspect of a protocol, they do not provide a complete specification of a protocol. Change: "It defines the protocol and ..." to "It defines the message set and ..."
DONE
3) Steve (SRT) to check that this has been done: Change to: Security layer: ensures that exchanged information are not modified or forged in a verifiable manner and that parties can be authenticated
DONE
4) SRT to draft initial sketch of primer with intro and table of contents and getting started for meeting 18th January 2005
Steve hopes to send something out by the end of this week for review on the 18th January, 2005 teleconference.
IN PROGRESS
5) Martin to do UML diagram from scratch for CDL
IN PROGRESS
6) Chairs to send out requests to review the CDL specification to:
Greg Meredith, JJ Dubray, Jean Baker, Yaron Golan
The current list as confirmed as Greg Meredith, Jean-Jacques Dubray, Jeanne Baker, Yaron Goland as individuals. Steve will draft an e-mail, run past Martin as co-chair and then send off - IN PROGRESS
Last call issues
============
Triages of last call comments:
The chairs suggested and the group agreed to defer issues requiring technical discussion until after the Last Call comments period has ended to make sure we don't waste time having a technical discussion that then has to be modified through further last call comments. However, we should assign editorials and remove duplicates as we go. Steve emphasised though that we can have and should have e-mail discussion on any technical comments.
957
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=957
Editorial - passed to editors and W3C staff
958
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=958
Editorial - Yves will work on this
959
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=959
Reject as other specifications are using the same format as we have used, compare for instance WSDL. Also this is more of a recommendation stage issue. Resolved WONTFIX
960
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=960
Close without fixing has the notation we have used is in WSDL and several OASIS XML specifications. It draws from XML DTD practice and is in relatively commonly used and is self explanatory. It seems the more self-explanatory than the alternative offered.
961
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=961
Editorial - make a statement in section 1.1 that the schema in the appendix takes priority. Where the informal schema differs from the formal one then it is an error in the specification and please notify W3C.
962
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=962
Editorial - pass to the editorial team.
963
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=963
Editorial - pass to the editorial team.
964
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=964
Reject without change. The namespace prefixes are given in a table at the front for examples, and also are in the formal XML schema. Resolve WONTFIX
965
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=965
Editorial - check all the XML fragments
966
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=966
Editorial
967
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=967
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
968
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=968
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
969
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=969
Editorial
970
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=970
Editorial
971
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=971
Major editorial so leave as an issue to discuss.
972
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=972
Editorial - a particular case of 965 - check carefully.
973
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=973
Defer discussion - resolution not clear
977
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=977
Editorial - add the suggested text in.
996
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=996
Resolve later - a WSDL problem
997
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=997
Editorial
998
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=998
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
999
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=999
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
1000
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1000
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
1001
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1001
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
1002
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1002
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
1003
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1003
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
1004
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1004
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
1005
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1005
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
1006
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1006
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue. Need to check the specification.
1007
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1007
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
1008
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1008
Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.
ACTION: Chairs to ensure proper documentation and tracing of decisions for resolved issues, and to inform the submitters.
Primer
======
Steve had no further news on progress, but again appealed for examples even if only partial. Tony reminded Steve of the examples in the specification, particularly in the finalise and finaliser sections and Steve responded that he was aware of these.
AoB
====
No other business connected with the work of this group was raised and so meeting was concluded.