Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 15 June 2010

<Bob> scribe: Ashok

<Bob> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2010Jun/0007.html

<scribe> scribenick: Ashok

Agenda

Agenda accepted

Minutes from June 8

RESOLUTION: Minutes of 2010-06-08 approved w/o

Advance Soap Assertions to Last Call? http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-ws-soap-assertions-20100608/

Bob: Any objections?

RESOLUTION: Soap Assertions to be published as last call

Bob: How long should last call be? It is a very short document.
... 3 or 4 weeks

RESOLUTION: No objections to a 3 week Last Call.

Need short abstracts for spec directory examples at http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/sparql#w3c_all

<Bob> http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/sparql#w3c_all

Bob: Who will volunteer to write abstracts?

Doug: I'll take a stab at it

<dug> ACTION: Doug to write up some abstracts [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/06/15-ws-ra-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-166 - Write up some abstracts [on Doug Davis - due 2010-06-22].

Heartbeat

1-Issue-9610 Eventing: Support WS-Management's heartbeat events http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9610 -wsman

<Tom_Rutt> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2010Jun/0004.html

<Bob> proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2010Jun/0004.html

TomRutt: Simplify d ... always send msg at regular intervals

WuChou: Using count may not good idea

TomRutt: Agrees with Wu

Rick: We would like to withdraw proposal
... WS-Man would like to use it's existing mechanism
... also remove GetStatus Verify option

Doug: Proposal is worthy of consideration for a primer ... later

<asoldano> +1

TomRutt: We do not need to remove what we have or not add a more general feature

Gil: Keep alive is worse than heartbeat
... increases shared state by a lot

Rick: The keep-alive uses a maximum interval. If you implement as regular heartbeat the max interval never exceeded
... can be implemented by alarm clock
... no need to keep distributed state

<dug> +1 to cwna and remove

Bob: Proposal to CNA and remove ... Option f.
... remove verify

TomRutt: Lets not take away what we have ... meets a general need

Bob: Do you want option e rather than f?

Doug: Disagrees. No need for what we added. That was for WS-Man. Will cause confusion

<Bob> ok, lets pick one

<Bob> e or f

Doug: Maybe we Doug, Can add later

<MartinC> who is going to implement getstatus?

Allesio: f

IBM: f

Microsoft: f

Fujistu: e

SoftwareAG: f

Avaya: abstain

Oracle: f

Bob: We pick f

RESOLUTION: Issue 9610 is resolved by removing the verify feature and reverting to original state

Issue 9609

<Bob> proposal at http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=887

2-Issue-9609 Enum: Support WS-Management's optimization of Enumerations with small result sets http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9609 -wsman proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2010Jun/0006.html and in the bug list

TomRutt: Any changes to response in existing spec?

Rick: Yes

Doug: Looks like a large premature optimization
... prefer to make pull an explicit enumerate

Bob: This is what we agreed to

TomRutt: Then why do we need enumerate

Doug: You would have a choice on the pull

Gil: Can we change to pull-enumerate?

Bob: Let's leave issue of the name aside to the time being

<dug> I'd be willing to writeup the proposal

Bob: would this meet your needs ... first pull alsways enumerate
... Can you write the proposal?

Doug: Yes

3-Issue-9781 WS-Eventing: mandates only subscribe/unsubscribe http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9781 -Li

Li: Explains issue

Wu: make only subscribe/unsubscribe as manadtory all else optional

Doug: Should not get rid of GetStatus
... Other mechanisms are not described in the spec
... defends GetStatus
... cost is negligible

Gil: Impl cost of GetStatus is low
... optional features in the spec are bad
... Support GetStatus

TomRutt: +1
... GetStatus is fundamental

Bob: So we agree we can drop Renew

Doug: I don't think Renew is that critical but easy to implement

<Tom_Rutt> +1 to dug on keeping renew

Bob: You want to keep the whole set

Wu: Originally Renew and GetStatus were optional

Bob: Any objection toclosing with no action

Wu: We would like only 2 operations subscribe/unsubscribe

TomRutt: Optionality is evil

<gpilz> +1 to Tom

<dug> +1 to tom

<asoldano> +1

TomRutt: cost to implement is very low

Bob: CNA?

RESOLUTION: No objections. Issue 9781 closed with no action
... Issue 9781 closed with no action

-Issue-8284 All: references to WSDL 1.1 should be to BP-corrected version http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8284 -Pilz (BP 1.2 and 2.0 status)

Ram: There will a proposal soon.