<dhull> issue MM01: Does anyone else have BC in the final four?

<dhull> issue MM02: Is 'Nova really that good?

<bob> zakim aabb is mlittle

<bob> zakim Microsoft is vernal

<pauld> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/report/

<bob> Following a discussion with the Director about cr3, I would like to make the following suggestion to the Working Group to strengthen the text about xml:id by replacing:

<bob> Attribute extensibility allows use of xml:id[xml:id] for

<bob> identification of these elements if desired.

<bob> by:

<bob> Hugo's proposal

<bob> An xml:id[xml:id] attribute SHOULD be used for identification of

<bob> these elements when desired, as allowed by the attribute

<bob> extensibility.

<pauld> "This is an apparent flaw in the design of Canonical XML. The Exclusive XML Canonicalization Version 1.0 specification does not have this feature and may be more appropriate for documents containing IDs."

<pauld> from: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-id/

<pauld> http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicSecurityProfile-1.0.html#Canonicalization

<pauld> says use exclusive canonicalisation

<bob> Resolution: close with no action

<bob> Hugo's email on note:

<bob> I would like to discuss the status section of the SOAP 1.1 Request Optional Response HTTP Binding document (current draft at [1]).

<bob> The status section needs to contain some customized text about the document and what the document is intended to do with it, which was unclear to me based on our discussion at the F2F[2].

<bob> More to the point, I would like to know how to deal with comments, and suggest that it would make sense to publish as a Working Draft first before retiring the document as a Working Group Note.

<bob> Resolution: accept Hugo's proposal, open comments for minimum window & coordinate with XMLP

<bob> Jonathan's point:

<bob> Jonathan's issue on cr namespace:Core spec section 1.2 says: "The Working Group intends to maintain the value of the Web Services Addressing 1.0 - Core namespace URI that was assigned in the Candidate Recommendation unless significant changes are made that impact the implementation of the specification."

<bob> I assume this can be removed in the PR version. Possibly the RDDL document could use some updated language about the final namespace URI too.

<bob> Resolutions: remove elements without changing namespace

<bob> Section 3.2.1 states:

<bob> Comparison of [destination] property values is out of scope, other than using simple string comparison to detect whether the value is anonymous, that is, where [destination] has the value "http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous".

<bob> I don’t believe this changed when we added the “none” URI, though it probably should have. A complete solution would allow both anon and none URIs to be detected through simple string comparison:

<bob> Comparison of [destination] property values is out of scope, other than using simple string comparison to detect whether the value is anonymous, that is, where [destination] has one of the values "http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous" or “http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/none”.

<bob> This is unfortunately probably related to the implementation of a LC issue rather than a CR one.

<bob> abve is quoted from Jonathan's email

<bob> Resolution: Close with no action

<bob> Jonathan's comment re infoset

<bob> The reference in the Core and SOAP bindings to the Infoset is to the first edition. Should they not be to the second edition instead?

<bob> Resolution: Hugo will fix this other stale references

Glen's issue "Where do faults go?"

<dorchard> What about generating a relatesTo for each messageID?

<dorchard> From a common sense, it does "relate to" each of the message ids...

<dorchard> Our job is to deal with edge cases. that's 90+% of specs is the edge cases.

<bob> Glen's comments / proposal on the topic

<bob> I'd propose we fix this by adding something like the following at the end of the last paragraph in section 3.2: "In that case, any duplicated headers MUST NOT be used to populate the appropriate MAPs - the MAPs should be interpreted as if no such headers were present." I *think* this should do it, and since we're already clear about the lack of an explicit FaultTo causing faults to go to ReplyTo, I think we're covered there.

<bob> I'd also like to add, for clarity, section headings for the last two paragraphs of section 3.2:

<bob> 3.2.1 Sending Messages

<bob> 3.2.2 Receiving Messages

<marc> A recipient MUST generate a wsa:InvalidAddressingHeader (see 016.4.1 Invalid Addressing Header) fault if such a message is received and any header with an incorrect cardinality MUST be ignored.

<marc> A recipient MUST generate a wsa:InvalidAddressingHeader (see 6.4.1 Invalid Addressing Header) fault if such a message is received; headers with an incorrect cardinality are not used to populate the corresponding abstract properties.

<GlenD> Alternate proposal - replace 2nd sentence with

<GlenD> If a message contains more than one wsa:To [...] targeted at a recipient, the corresponding property MUST NOT be populated.

<dhull> brb

<marc> A recipient MUST generate a wsa:InvalidAddressingHeader (see 6.4.1 Invalid Addressing Header) fault if such a message is received; headers with an incorrect cardinality MUST NOT be used to populate the corresponding abstract properties.

<bob> Resolution: accept text above

<bob> 3.2.1 Sending Messages

<bob> 3.2.2 Receiving Messages

<bob> Resolution: accept above changes

<bob> Resolution: take core and soap to PR

<bob> Resolution: Hugo clarifies that WG note may be published without comment period

<marc> ed copy updated:http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2004/ws/addressing/ws-addr-soap.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#s12moduledesc

<dorchard> gEt LoSt

<dorchard> Sometimes called "alternating character camel-case v2"

<bob> Scribe: Pete

<bob> thanks pete for scribing

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.127  of Date: 2005/08/16 15:12:03  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/clean up/remove/
Found Scribe: Pete

WARNING: 1 scribe lines found (out of 202 total lines.)
Are you sure you specified a correct ScribeNick?


WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: Andreas_Bjarlestam Bob_Freund Dave_Hull Dave_Orchard David_Illsley GlenD Hugo IBM Jonathan Jonathan_Marsh Katy Katy_Warr Marc_Hadley Mark_Little Microsoft Nilo P13 P15 P3 Paco Paul_Downey Pete_Wenzel Prasad_Yendluri Resolutions Steve_Vinoski TRutt Tom_Rutt TonyR Vikas_Deolaliker aaaa aabb andreas bob by dhull dorchard from is marc pauld perhaps prasad vikas vinoski yinleng
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/7D5D3FDA429F4D469ADF210408D6245A0390D2@jeeves.freunds.com
Got date from IRC log name: 13 Mar 2006
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2006/03/13-ws-addr-minutes.html
People with action items: