Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference

25 Aug 2009


See also: IRC log


Ashok Malhotra, Oracle Corp.
Asir Vedamuthu, Microsoft Corp.
Bob Freund, Hitachi, Ltd.
David Snelling, Fujitsu, Ltd.
Doug Davis, IBM
Fred Maciel, Hitachi, Ltd.
Gilbert Pilz, Oracle Corp.
Jeff Mischkinsky, Oracle Corp.
Li Li, Avaya Communications
Mark Little, Red Hat
Paul Nolan, IBM
Ram Jeyaraman, Microsoft Corp.
Sreedhara Narayanaswamy, CA
Tom Rutt, Fujitsu, Ltd.
Vikas Varma, Software AG
Yves Lafon, W3C/ERCIM
Bob Natale, MITRE Corp.
Katy Warr, IBM
Orit Levin, Microsoft Corp.
Paul Fremantle, WSO2
Prasad Yendluri, Software AG
Wu Chou, Avaya Communications
Bob Freund, Hitachi, Ltd.
Li Li


<trackbot> Date: 25 August 2009

<Bob> trackbot, start telecon

<trackbot> Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 25 August 2009

<Bob> scribe: Li Li

<Bob> scribenick: Li


agenda agreed

Approval of 2009-08-18 minutes

<Bob> minutes link http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/9/08/2009-08-18.html

RESOLUTION: Minutes of 2009-08-18 accepted

Chair unavailable 2009-09-08

Yves confirms that he will be able to chair

Logistics, Hursley face to face on 2009-09-30 through 2009-10-02

Logistics info at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0071.html

2009-07-24 Snapshot review of mex and rt

ram had some comments

dug and ram figure out which comments and agree they are resolved

<dug> comments at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0055.html

RESOLUTION: Incorporated resolutions in 2009-07-24 snapshots of mex and rt accepted

Review of action items

Bob: Notes that good progress has been made on action items and and reminds members to keep an eye on due dates

Progress on ws-frag

ram: needs a few more days to polish

bob: fpwd needs to be out by sept (next month) in order to hold our schedule

ram: that's acceptable

Issue-7365 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7365

bob: objection to proposal?

RESOLUTION: Issue-7365 resolved as proposed

Issue-7235 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7235

<dug> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0070.html

Dug: explains issue and proposal

<dug> ** New dialect

<dug> definitions MUST include sufficient information for proper application.

<dug> For example, it would need to include the context (which data) over which

<dug> the filter operates. ***

bob: append proposed text to previous proposal?

asir: when does context change?

dug: context of xpath changes from envelope to event data

context may change for other uri too, like actionURI

Asir: i don't recall discussing change of context being discussed

<dug> "... a new dialect might be defined to support filtering based on data not included in the notification message itself."

Gil: generic use of xpath is insufficient as it doesn't tell the context

therefore, ws-e needs a new uri to convey the context

Asir: it's new to me that uri indicates context

Dug: filter always needs context

Tom: do we need context to complicate thing?

Dug: yes, we have filter on action, topic, etc. beside just event data itself

Asir: uri needs to point to stable xpath

Dug: maybe to separate flexibility to another issue

Bob: we can define a uri for backward compability, folks will be able to define a filter accordingly

Asir: it's ok if this is a simple case

<asir> Asir: if we were to define our own namespace name then this would be a unique case and not set any precedence

Dug: we have to do it as gil explained the use cases

Asir: it's not clear what is replaced

Dug: two parts: one is to swap out uri; the other is the text

<dug> new text is in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0070.html

figuring out the consolidated proposal...

asir: make uri to xpath 1.0?

daves: a different uri for xpath 2.0 then?

<asir> Here is the draft proposal

<asir> 1. Append to Section '[Body]/wse:Subscribe/wse:Filter/@Dialect

<asir> '

<asir> *** New dialect definitions MUST include sufficient informalion for proper application. For example, it would need to include the context (which data) over which the filter operates. ***

<asir> 2. Replace http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116 with http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ws-evt/Dialects/XPath10

<dug> 3. and similar for enum

bob: any object to the above proposal to 7235?

RESOLUTION: Issue-7235 resolved with proposal above without objection

Issue-7270 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7270

<dug> Unless otherwise noted, all URIs are absolute URIs and URI comparison MUST be performed according to [RFC 3986] section 6.2.1.

<Ram> test

yves: it's better to stay within uri instead of iri

Bob: any objections to the proposal?

ram: any exception to the general rule?

dug: i couldn't find any...

RESOLUTION: Issue-7270 resolved as proposed

Issue-7160 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7160

RESOLUTION: Issue- 7160 resolved as proposed

New Issue-7426

RESOLUTION: Issue-7426 accepted as a new issue

bob: ban the use of iri where uri comparison is used?

<dug> can we see some text?

AI for yves to propose text for 7426

<asir> ACTION: Yves to propose text for issue 7426 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-ws-ra-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-97 - Propose text for issue 7426 [on Yves Lafon - due 2009-09-01].

Issue-7196 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7196

<asir> Didn't you resolve it last week?

<asir> doubly resolved!

RESOLUTION: Issue-7196 resolved (or resolution confirmed)

Issue-6533 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6533

yves: explains the issue

dug: why do we need this?

yves: we need to specify the property of that operation

dug: do we need to do the same for "getstatus"?

yves: we should spell out for all safe operations

<gpilz> +1

dug: then we need to apply it to all specs

asir: why not idempotent?

<asir> Here is a link to Feb discussion ... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0045.html

yves: we could do that if people like it

gil: this is a constraint on implementations
... we should do it for other specs as well

<dug> +1 obviously

gil: find all safe operations first

<scribe> ACTION: yves to include all safe operations in all specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-ws-ra-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-98 - Include all safe operations in all specs [on Yves Lafon - due 2009-09-01].

Issue-6401 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6401

<gpilz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/att-0057/wseventing_6401-6.html

gil: explains the new proposal 6401

looks ok to me

<dug> interesting - I'm missing the section header for appendix A when I look at the html version too - but the word doc is ok

<dug> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/att-0061/ws-eventing-6401-6-dug2.doc

dug: some editorial changes, remove duplicates about mex

<Bob> Dug presents an amended proposal

<Ram> I would like to understand this sentence in Dug's revision: "An Event Source there MUST NOT exist more than one EventDescription document."

ram: why that constraint?

dug: it's in the original proposal

gil: more than ED document complicates relations to NW

asir: i don't fully understand the requirement
... to relate ED and NW

dug: one ED doc should be returned, more than one adds complexity
... one ED doc hides complexity

asir: multiple docs is supported by mex in multi sections

<Zakim> dug, you wanted to ask a clarifying question

dug: what subscriber do with multi docs?

asir: client handles multi-docs according to the standards

gil: we are profiling mex
... we make it clear how different parts are related

<asir> Gil - i was only trying to help you! Nothing more.

<dug> sorry - power went out

gil: if two ED docs and two NW docs are returned, then which goes which is not clear

<asir> Vow .. are we closing 6401?


<dug> never! :-)

<dug> I can send in a new rev with the typo that Ram noticed fixed

<dug> if people want

li: would like to read it

ram: we would like to postpone it until next week

bob: review dug's proposal next week as basis of 6401

<DaveS> Goodnight

<gpilz> good job li!

bob: declare victory for today...

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: yves to include all safe operations in all specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-ws-ra-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Yves to propose text for issue 7426 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-ws-ra-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/09/02 11:43:50 $