WS-Resource Access WG Distributed Meeting

20 Jan 2009


See also: IRC log


Ashok Malhotra, Oracle Corp.
Asir Vedamuthu, Microsoft Corp.
Bob Freund, Hitachi, Ltd.
Doug Davis, IBM
Geoff Bullen, Microsoft Corp.
Gilbert Pilz, Oracle Corp.
Greg Carpenter, Microsoft Corp.
Jeff Mischkinsky, Oracle Corp.
Katy Warr, IBM
Li Li, Avaya Communications
Prasad Yendluri, Software AG
Sumeet Vij, Software AG
Vikas Varma, Software AG
Wu Chou, Avaya Communications
Yves Lafon, W3C/ERCIM
Bob Natale, MITRE Corp.
Fred Maciel, Hitachi, Ltd.
Mark Little, Red Hat
Ranga Reddy Makireddy, CA
Sreedhara Narayanaswamy, CA
Bob Freund
Greg Carpenter, Bob


<Bob> scribe: Greg Carpenter

<scribe> scribenick: GregC

The agenda is available at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jan/0045.html


add "unilateral wihtdrawal of issues" to the agenda

Minutes Approval

People need more time to read and approve minutes from f2f

Next week's meeting

bob: I wont be able chair
... should we cancel or have Yves chair?

Meeting will be held as planned, Yves will chair

creation of first working drafts

bob: Editors should use CVS to avoid "lost updates" from multiple editors

Editors need to get Public Keys if they don't already have one

bob: first drafts in W3C format with no changes
... who will produce which first working drafts and when

dug: are there conversion tools and should we use them?

asir: conversion tools are avialable but still require significant manual effort

<dug> yves which doc were you thinking of?

Yves: Perhaps some subnissions are already up to spec and will be easier?

bob: In two weeks time, all submitted specs will be converted and available in xml spec format
... specs may come out independently during that time
... people will be given adequate time to review

<scribe> ACTION: editors will have first Public Working drafts available on or before Feb 3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/20-ws-ra-minutes.html#action01]

<asir> Yves - you probably want to think about a Tracker user named 'editors'

<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel

<trackbot> If you want to associate this channel with an existing Tracker, please say 'trackbot, associate this channel with #channel' (where #channel is the name of default channel for the group)

Primer - What, who, how, when?

<Yves> tracker not associated to irc yet, but we can the web interface for now

bob: some WGs find a primer to be a useful aid to understanding the specs
... Shall the WS-RA WG produce a primer?

??: One Primer per spec, or just one Primer?

<dug> While I think, in general, primers are good, until we have an area of confusion I'd prefer to wait

bob: Is there anyone on this call who is willing to write a Primer?

gpilz: maybe

<dug> my first choice would be to have areas of confusion be fixed in the spec

GregC: Primers are for wordy explanations that might not be appropriate for a spec

gpilz: tend to agree -- good place for use cases, etc

new issues

<Yves> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6442

Issue 6442

bob: any opposition to accepting issue 6442?
... Accepted without opposition
... Issue assigned to gpilz
... I assume the open question in the initial issue will be addressed with a more specific proposal

Geoff: Note that this is another example of the larger upgrade to support WS-Addressing REC
... do we have lots of individual issues (which is OK, just asking)

<Prasad2> +1 to having separate issues, helps focus the issue to specific area or matter

<dug> bob - there's 6459

<dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6459

bob: granularity is up to the issue submitter

<scribe> new issue 6459

<gpilz> good catch!

bob: issue 6459 accepted without opposition and assigned to Li

Issues with proposals:

<dug> this is the _easy_ one you mentioned at the f2f :-)

<Bob> scribe: Bob

<Prasad2> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6433


proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jan/0041.html

<gpilz> +1 to Doug

<dug> LOL

<Prasad2> So, the WS-A:EPR definition has no extensibility built in?

<gpilz> EPR's have extensibility in them

Bob: The extensibility facet of this issue was decided at the f2f to be separate from the decision of which version of epr to reference

resolution: Resolve Issue-6433 with the proposal contained in Bugzilla Comment #1 w/o

<dug> latest 6398: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jan/0043.html


<Prasad2> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6398

<dug> no objection to more digestion/composting :-)

<asir> what was that :-)

send to the list and defer consideration for a future meeting


<dug> since this was pretty much covered at the f2f I wouldn't object to accepting it now - but no objection to composting either :-)

proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jan/0047.html

Li introduces his proposal

<gpilz> I wouldn't object to accepting it either - good work


Li introduces his prosal

<gpilz> again this looks acceptable

Issues 6408 6409 6410 6414 6415 6416

Originator wishes to withdraw these issues

resolution: Close Issues 6408, 6409, 6410, 6414, 6415, and 6416 without action w/o

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: editors will have first Public Working drafts available on or before Feb 3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/20-ws-ra-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.134 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/03/04 11:31:42 $