20:39:11 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ws-Addr
20:39:11 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/12/19-ws-Addr-irc
20:39:14 <mnot> zakim, this will be WS_ADDR
20:39:14 <Zakim> ok, mnot; I see WS_AddrWG()4:00PM scheduled to start in 21 minutes
20:39:29 <mnot> Meeting: Web Services Addressing Working Group Teleconference
20:39:33 <mnot> Chair: Mark Nottingham
20:47:31 <mnot> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/BA74ACFF-E8C2-40B9-899F-8C95213E797B@bea.com
20:53:49 <David_Illsley> David_Illsley has joined #ws-addr
20:56:30 <Nilo> Nilo has joined #ws-addr
20:57:45 <TonyR> TonyR has joined #ws-addr
20:58:14 <pauld> pauld has joined #ws-addr
20:58:26 <uyalcina> uyalcina has joined #ws-addr
20:58:47 <Zakim> WS_AddrWG()4:00PM has now started
20:59:28 <mnot> zakim, who is here?
20:59:29 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
20:59:30 <Zakim> On IRC I see uyalcina, pauld, TonyR, Nilo, David_Illsley, RRSAgent, Zakim, mnot, prasad
20:59:31 <uyalcina> i will be a little bit late, 
20:59:40 <uyalcina> My office has moved and there is some work here. 
20:59:47 <PaulKnight> PaulKnight has joined #ws-addr
21:00:06 <Gil> Gil has joined #ws-addr
21:00:34 <Katy> Katy has joined #ws-addr
21:00:42 <Pete> Pete has joined #ws-Addr
21:01:06 <Gil> zakim, you are confused
21:01:06 <Zakim> I don't understand 'you are confused', Gil
21:01:16 <Gil> zakim, exactly
21:01:16 <Zakim> I don't understand 'exactly', Gil
21:01:18 <Jonathan_Marsh> Jonathan_Marsh has joined #ws-addr
21:01:25 <yinleng> yinleng has joined #ws-addr
21:02:11 <Paco> Paco has joined #ws-addr
21:02:37 <mnot> zakim, who is here?
21:02:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
21:02:38 <dorchard> dorchard has joined #ws-addr
21:02:39 <Zakim> On IRC I see Paco, yinleng, Jonathan_Marsh, Pete, Katy, Gil, PaulKnight, uyalcina, pauld, TonyR, Nilo, David_Illsley, RRSAgent, Zakim, mnot, prasad
21:02:46 <bob> bob has joined #ws-addr
21:02:57 <pauld> zakim, this will be a turing test
21:02:57 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled near this time, pauld
21:03:04 <anish> anish has joined #ws-addr
21:03:13 <plh> plh has joined #ws-addr
21:03:24 <TRutt> TRutt has joined #ws-addr
21:03:25 <plh> zakim, call plh-work
21:03:26 <Zakim> ok, plh; the call is being made
21:03:43 <Jonathan_Marsh> zakim, passcode?
21:03:43 <Zakim> the conference code is 2337 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), Jonathan_Marsh
21:03:57 <dorchard> dave's here
21:04:05 <marc> marc has joined #ws-addr
21:04:15 <Jonathan_Marsh> dave's there ;-)
21:04:24 <dhull> dhull has joined #ws-addr
21:04:59 <noone> I'm here!
21:05:01 <pauld> zakim, no one holds the working group
21:05:01 <Zakim> I don't understand 'no one holds the working group', pauld
21:08:45 <prasad> scribe: prasad
21:08:52 <uyalcina> uyalcina has joined #ws-addr
21:09:10 <prasad> 2. Agenda review, AOB
21:09:21 <prasad> Mark review agenda
21:09:34 <prasad> 3. Call for corrections to the minutes 
21:09:39 <prasad> No corrections
21:09:50 <prasad> resolution: approved minutes of dec 12 05
21:10:04 <prasad> 4. Review action items
21:10:24 <prasad> all pending
21:10:41 <prasad> topic: XMLP Request for requirements feedback
21:10:59 <prasad> Anish: Issue is still open
21:11:31 <Zakim> 'restarting in a minute to recover teleconference state'
21:11:39 <dhull> q+
21:12:03 <prasad> Anish: issue to resolve in soap 1.2 erratum or in the new XMLP work
21:12:37 <Katy> np
21:14:00 <prasad> Anish: We initially did not want to fix in errata as it impacts too much in the spec. But Noah may have changed mind
21:14:48 <uyalcina> q+
21:15:19 <mnot> ack dhull
21:15:48 <prasad> Dhul: I was on the XMLP call. Noah thinks can be done in erratum. Does not see a need for one-ay MEP
21:15:53 <vikas> vikas has joined #ws-addr
21:15:59 <prasad> s/-ay/-way/
21:16:11 <anish> q+
21:16:15 <prasad> s/Dhul:/DHull:/
21:16:31 <RalphS_> RalphS_ has joined #ws-addr
21:16:33 <anish> q?
21:16:36 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ws-Addr
21:16:41 <RalphS_> zakim, this is addr
21:16:41 <Zakim> ok, RalphS_; that matches WS_AddrWG()4:00PM
21:16:45 <RalphS_> zakim, who's on the call?
21:16:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see David_Illsley, Mark_Nottingham, Gilbert_Pilz, ??P3, Prasad_Yendluri, Mark_Little, Bob_Freund, Paul_Knight, Nilo, [IBM], Tom_Rutt, Pete_Wenzel,
21:16:48 <Zakim> ... Mark_Peel/Katy_Warr, Dave_Orchard, Marc_Hadley, Plh, ??P16, Dave_Hull, Anish, Umit_Yalcinalp, Jonathan_Marsh, +44.144.250.aaaa, Vikas_Deolaliker
21:16:57 <RalphS_> sorry for the inconvenience, folks
21:17:03 <TRutt> q+
21:17:35 <mnot_2> mnot_2 has joined #ws-addr
21:17:38 <Zakim> -Vikas_Deolaliker
21:17:39 <prasad> Umit: When is the decision on errata vs new work going to be made?
21:18:04 <RalphS_> RalphS_ has left #ws-addr
21:18:27 <mnot_2> q?
21:18:32 <prasad> Anish: I don't think it is either or
21:18:40 <uyalcina> uyalcina has joined #ws-addr
21:18:51 <plh> zakim, who's here?
21:18:53 <Zakim> On the phone I see David_Illsley, Mark_Nottingham, Gilbert_Pilz, ??P3, Prasad_Yendluri, Mark_Little, Bob_Freund, Paul_Knight, Nilo, [IBM], Tom_Rutt, Pete_Wenzel,
21:18:55 <Zakim> ... Mark_Peel/Katy_Warr, Dave_Orchard, Marc_Hadley, Plh, ??P16, Dave_Hull, Anish, Umit_Yalcinalp, Jonathan_Marsh, +44.144.250.aaaa, Vikas_Deolaliker
21:18:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see uyalcina, mnot_2, Zakim, vikas, dhull, marc, TRutt, plh, anish, bob, dorchard, Paco, yinleng, Marsh, Pete, Katy, Gil, PaulKnight, pauld, TonyR, Nilo, David_Illsley,
21:19:01 <Zakim> ... RRSAgent, mnot, prasad
21:19:02 <Zakim> +Vikas_Deolaliker.a
21:19:10 <pauld> zakim, who is making noise?
21:19:23 <Zakim> pauld, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Mark_Nottingham (68%), Gilbert_Pilz (12%), ??P16 (20%), Vikas_Deolaliker (49%)
21:19:43 <prasad> prank call ?
21:19:45 <pauld> zakim, who is making noise?
21:19:56 <Zakim> pauld, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Mark_Nottingham (69%), Gilbert_Pilz (4%), Vikas_Deolaliker (44%)
21:20:13 <dorchard> please paste # into irc
21:20:14 <marc> did someone get that number ?
21:20:14 <prasad> 866-214-3176
21:20:15 <Marsh> 1-866-214-3176: 
21:20:22 <Zakim> -Vikas_Deolaliker
21:20:28 <Marsh> #2979273
21:20:40 <mnot_2> +1 866 214 3176 (US)
21:20:40 <mnot_2> +1 404 827 9098 (non-US)
21:20:41 <mnot_2> Access Code: 2979273
21:20:45 <Zakim> -Bob_Freund
21:20:47 <Zakim> -Dave_Orchard
21:20:51 <Zakim> -Vikas_Deolaliker.a
21:20:58 <TRutt> sounds like downs syndrome to me
21:21:01 <Zakim> -??P3
21:21:03 <Zakim> -David_Illsley
21:21:06 <Zakim> -Mark_Peel/Katy_Warr
21:21:18 <Zakim> -Marc_Hadley
21:21:19 <Zakim> -Plh
21:21:19 <Zakim> -Jonathan_Marsh
21:21:20 <Zakim> -Mark_Nottingham
21:21:20 <Zakim> -Dave_Hull
21:21:21 <Zakim> -[IBM]
21:21:22 <Zakim> -Umit_Yalcinalp
21:21:23 <Zakim> -Pete_Wenzel
21:21:25 <Zakim> -Prasad_Yendluri
21:21:27 <Zakim> -Anish
21:21:29 <Zakim> -Tom_Rutt
21:21:31 <Zakim> - +44.144.250.aaaa
21:21:31 <prasad> swithing over to other line
21:21:33 <Zakim> -Nilo
21:21:35 <Zakim> -??P16
21:21:37 <Zakim> -Paul_Knight
21:21:39 <Zakim> -Gilbert_Pilz
21:21:58 <Zakim> -Mark_Little
21:21:59 <Zakim> WS_AddrWG()4:00PM has ended
21:22:00 <Zakim> Attendees were David_Illsley, Mark_Nottingham, Gilbert_Pilz, Prasad_Yendluri, Mark_Little, Bob_Freund, Paul_Knight, Nilo, [IBM], Tom_Rutt, Pete_Wenzel, Mark_Peel/Katy_Warr,
21:22:02 <Zakim> ... Dave_Orchard, Marc_Hadley, Plh, Dave_Hull, Anish, Umit_Yalcinalp, Jonathan_Marsh, +44.144.250.aaaa, Vikas_Deolaliker
21:22:11 <TRutt> Host not yet arrived
21:23:12 <pauld> zakim, aaaa is me
21:23:12 <Zakim> sorry, pauld, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
21:23:35 <plh> q?
21:23:43 <prasad> Restarting
21:25:01 <prasad> Trutt: Distingushing reliable vs non-reliable transports is important
21:26:10 <prasad> DHull: Do we really need one-way MEP from XMLP?
21:27:04 <prasad> Anish: One-Way MEP in Errata or new effort?
21:27:10 <prasad> DHull: New
21:28:38 <uyalcina> q+
21:29:02 <prasad> DaveO: Real question is req optional response good enough?
21:29:08 <mnot_2> ack uyal
21:30:18 <dorchard> Seems to me that wsdl one-way could map to soap request-optional-response mep.
21:30:39 <dorchard> And I'd rather not "hijack" this discussion to meet some other requirement.
21:30:42 <dhull> cheese sandwich with no bread
21:30:51 <prasad> Umit: Is whats on the table maping WSDL MEP to SOAP optional resp 
21:31:26 <prasad> dhull: believe so, not sure
21:31:52 <prasad> mnot: No feed back at this pint to XMLP. Moving on
21:32:36 <prasad> DHull: We can set the expectation as our feedback
21:32:59 <prasad> Topic: 6. Test Suite and Testing Update
21:33:08 <prasad> Mnot: Where are we on that
21:33:21 <prasad> Paul: Probably on track
21:34:03 <prasad> paul: MS put out two end points. IBM put out a web page
21:34:34 <prasad> paul: some test broke; trying to fix
21:36:17 <prasad> Mnot: Plan to do some tests end-to-end for the vancouver f2f
21:37:02 <Zakim> WS_AddrWG()4:00PM has now started
21:37:09 <Zakim> +??P0
21:37:17 <Zakim> -??P0
21:37:19 <Zakim> WS_AddrWG()4:00PM has ended
21:37:21 <Zakim> Attendees were 
21:37:47 <prasad> 7. Working Draft Issues
21:38:00 <prasad> Topic: i066 - wsaw:UsingAddressing as a policy assertion
21:39:13 <prasad> Topic: i059 - Support for asynchronous / multi-MEP usage of web services
21:39:32 <prasad> Mnot: We split i59 into three parts last week
21:40:09 <dorchard> For the record, I haven't had a chance to review the umit's proposal because it arrived on Sunday night.
21:41:03 <prasad> Mnot: i67 and i68 in addtion to i59
21:41:45 <mnot_2> http://www.w3.org/mid/2BA6015847F82645A9BB31C7F9D64165CC1F92@uspale20.pal.sap.corp
21:41:46 <mnot_2> 
21:41:47 <prasad> Mnot: Un=mt has a new proposal
21:41:48 <Marsh> q+
21:42:07 <prasad> s/Un=mt/Umit/
21:42:58 <mnot_2> ack Marsh
21:43:15 <marc> q+
21:43:17 <prasad> Mnot: Too many Proposals and status is confusing 
21:43:43 <dhull> q+
21:43:59 <prasad> Marsh: Proposal does not seem specific enough
21:45:31 <anish> q+
21:45:33 <prasad> Marsh: If I have a method tht has a reply and fault and one of them is anonymous am i required to generate a fault?
21:45:36 <dorchard> Seems to me that Jonathan's concerns about fault handling might need to be handled by a new issue.
21:45:39 <dhull> fault goes back as transport-level response (if available).  After we understand WSA headers and WSA is engaged, anonymous means "response channel"
21:45:48 <dhull> +1 to DaveO
21:45:53 <dhull> q+
21:46:39 <dorchard> q+ to mention that SOAP already has this problem, and it says that faults may or may not be delivered... c'est la vie.
21:46:56 <dhull> prohibited is currently defined in terms of what may appear (not what is used)
21:46:57 <anish> +1 to daveo
21:47:01 <dhull> +1 to anish
21:47:14 <anish> difference between generating a fault and sending a fault
21:48:14 <prasad> discussion on malformed fault handling
21:48:28 <prasad> ... between umit, Marsh and others
21:51:38 <dhull> Let's not say "anonymous" so much here.  Back-channel, response or whatever makes sense outside of WSA.  "Anonymous" only means anything in WSA.
21:52:21 <pauld> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Dec/0079.html
21:52:27 <pauld> pauld has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Dec/0079.html
21:53:27 <mnot_2> q?
21:53:36 <mnot_2> ack marc
21:53:47 <anish> q-
21:56:09 <prasad> Marc; We provide two ways to do using addressing and in SOAP module we don not proide a way to do anonymous equivalent
21:56:24 <prasad> s/;/:/
21:56:51 <anish> you could use a property
21:57:11 <prasad> Mnot: Can do discuss this in i67?
21:59:38 <vikas> vikas has joined #ws-addr
22:00:18 <prasad> DaveO: U can set properties but, properties are global and not scoped to an operation
22:05:18 <mnot_2> q?
22:05:52 <anish> q+
22:06:00 <mnot_2> ack dhull
22:13:35 <anish> q-
22:13:45 <anish> q+ to request a ed change to example 3-3
22:18:23 <marc> q+
22:20:08 <mnot_2> ack dorchard
22:20:08 <Zakim> dorchard, you wanted to mention that SOAP already has this problem, and it says that faults may or may not be delivered... c'est la vie.
22:20:49 <uyalcina> it is not as is. You can always raise issues about the wording. 
22:23:03 <Zakim> WS_AddrWG()4:00PM has now started
22:23:09 <Zakim> WS_AddrWG()4:00PM has ended
22:23:10 <Zakim> Attendees were 
22:23:34 <mnot_2> q?
22:23:42 <mnot_2> q+ anish
22:23:45 <mnot_2> q+ marc
22:24:48 <mnot> ack anish
22:27:20 <mnot> ACTION: Umit to incorporate anon element into example 3-3 in conjunction with wsoap:module
22:27:21 <prasad> Anish: asks for examples in section 3-3 use of anonymous element in conjunction with SOAP module
22:27:36 <mnot> ack marc
22:28:11 <vikas> vikas has joined #ws-addr
22:28:13 <prasad> Marc: Concerned with including text in section 3.4
22:28:59 <mnot> q?
22:29:21 <prasad> MNot: None questioned 3.4 so far
22:32:54 <anish> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Dec/att-0080/ws-addr-wsdlProposedRevision1.62.html
22:33:06 <dorchard> dorchard has joined #ws-addr
22:34:25 <dhull> q+
22:34:27 <anish> q+ to ask about "empty SOAP envelope in section 3.4
22:36:43 <prasad> Mnot: Like to close i59 with Umit's proposal with the "anonymous text" in 3.3 deleted and examples added, text in section 3.4 is subject to editorial update.
22:37:17 <prasad> Marc: 3.4 is not going in the doc?
22:37:29 <prasad> MNot: It is, but can raise issues againt it.
22:38:26 <prasad> Umit: Why don't we add an editoril note in section 3.4 that the folllowing text is subject to change?
22:39:00 <dorchard> Why not just accept up to 3.4?  3.4 is easily talked about in email/proposals.
22:39:37 <dhull> 3.4.1 captures one useful scenario.  OK with noting that, but there are useful scenarios that conflict with that text.  OK with 3.4.1 as long as it's clearly scoped
22:40:17 <dhull> q+
22:40:24 <bob> +1 Katy
22:40:27 <dorchard> q+
22:40:40 <prasad> Katy: Likes Umit's proposal
22:40:52 <dorchard> q+ to say that we can get consensus to accept up to 3.4, so let's do that and be uncontroversial.
22:41:16 <dhull> q+ to clarify discomfort with 3.4.1
22:41:47 <prasad> MArc: uncomfortable with putting 3.4 in spec
22:41:53 <uyalcina> q+
22:41:59 <prasad> Mnot: That is a separate issue
22:42:19 <dorchard> q-
22:42:37 <uyalcina> Not accepting 3.4 is mixed with the concept of putting it to a different document. This is not a content issue. 
22:42:51 <prasad> TRutt: I would go with putting in 3.4 with a disclaimer
22:43:12 <prasad> Anish: Adding a note seems a reasonable way fwd
22:44:07 <prasad> Marsh: When there is no consensus what is the status quo? What is in the doc ?
22:44:37 <prasad> MarsH; What we have not agreed to should not be in the doc
22:44:45 <pauld> +1 to Jonathan - the document should reflect the Status Quo, not least for generating test cases
22:44:56 <prasad> s/H;/h:/
22:45:00 <mnot> ack dhull
22:45:00 <Zakim> dhull, you wanted to clarify discomfort with 3.4.1
22:45:09 <dorchard> +1 to Jonathan on declaring victory up to 3.4
22:45:48 <mnot> ack anish
22:45:48 <Zakim> anish, you wanted to ask about "empty SOAP envelope in section 3.4
22:46:13 <Paco> q+
22:47:12 <prasad> Anish: In 3.4.1 2nd sub-bullet 1. What is "empty SOAP Env"? Empty HTTP entity Body, with SOAP hdrs ?
22:47:30 <TRutt> q+
22:48:00 <prasad> Marc / Umit: we need another issue on this
22:48:41 <mnot> ack uyal
22:49:13 <prasad> Umit: Options: Don't say anything about SOAP 1.1 HTTP binding; put text with disclaimers.. 
22:49:39 <prasad> Umit: I am infavor of putting in w/ disclaimer
22:50:08 <prasad> Marc: Can we find in the minutes what we agreed to?
22:50:40 <mnot> ack paco
22:51:27 <prasad> Paco: What we agreed to at the f2f is status quo
22:51:29 <mnot> ack TRutt
22:51:53 <prasad> Trutt: Text in 3.4 reflects what we agreed in the meeting
22:53:08 <dhull> In other words, the rule is, if you get a message over HTTP, you *must* send something back (which is what HTTP demands anyway).  If you don't know what to say, send an empty 202.
22:53:12 <prasad> MNot: proposes we accept as resolution for i59 all changes in Umit's proposal upto section 3.4 ...
22:54:16 <prasad> s/3.4/3.2 and editor's recollection of what we agreed to at f2f/
22:54:36 <prasad> Anish: what about examples?
22:54:44 <prasad> Mnot: Those included
22:55:08 <TRutt> q+
22:57:47 <dorchard> Marc, Mark said "upto section 3.4 "
22:59:45 <prasad> Mnot: Any objections to proposal?
22:59:51 <prasad> Marsh: I object
23:01:05 <prasad> Taking a formal vote
23:01:33 <yinleng> abstain
23:03:06 <dorchard> why are people abstaining?
23:03:26 <dorchard> Is it because not enough text going in?  Or too much?  
23:03:27 <prasad> Yes - 10; No -2; Abs - 3;
23:03:45 <prasad> Mnot: Motion Carries; i59 is closed
23:04:16 <bob> bob has left #ws-addr
23:04:18 <TonyR> TonyR has left #ws-addr
23:04:22 <prasad> No meeting next 2 weeks. Reconvene Jan 9th
23:04:30 <prasad> Adjurn
23:04:52 <yinleng> yinleng has left #ws-addr
23:05:12 <prasad> rrsagent, make logs public
23:05:29 <prasad> rrsagent, generate minutes
23:05:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/12/19-ws-Addr-minutes.html prasad
23:08:39 <pauld> quit to sleep
23:54:24 <dhull> dhull has joined #ws-addr