IRC log of ws-desc on 2006-07-13
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 13:58:26 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #ws-desc
- 13:58:26 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ws-desc-irc
- 13:58:36 [TonyR]
- zakim, this will be wsdl
- 13:58:36 [Jonathan]
- Jonathan has joined #ws-desc
- 13:58:36 [Zakim]
- ok, TonyR; I see WS_DescWG(WSDL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
- 14:01:18 [Zakim]
- WS_DescWG(WSDL)10:00AM has now started
- 14:01:22 [Zakim]
- +??P6
- 14:01:35 [TonyR]
- zakim, ??p6 is me
- 14:01:35 [Zakim]
- +TonyR; got it
- 14:02:27 [Zakim]
- +Arthur_Ryman
- 14:02:35 [Arthur]
- Arthur has joined #ws-desc
- 14:03:15 [Zakim]
- +Jonathan_Marsh
- 14:11:00 [youenn]
- youenn has joined #ws-desc
- 14:11:18 [TonyR]
- Arthur: if I am processing a WSDL document and encounter an extension I do not recognise, with wsdl:required=true, is the document invalid?
- 14:11:47 [TonyR]
- Tony & Jonathan: yes, it is invalid (in the context)
- 14:12:26 [TonyR]
- Arthur: if, on the other hand, it is marked wsdl:required=false, is it valid?
- 14:12:48 [TonyR]
- Tony & Jonathan: yes, it is valid (unless otherwise invalid)
- 14:13:45 [Zakim]
- +??P19
- 14:13:56 [TonyR]
- Arthur: just deciding where to put the test cases
- 14:14:57 [TonyR]
- Arthur: might be a good idea to issue a warning when encountering a unrecognised extension (even with required=false)
- 14:16:00 [TonyR]
- action item Arthur test cases for message exchanges from a simple WSDL - done
- 14:22:01 [TonyR]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 14:22:01 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see TonyR, Arthur_Ryman, Jonathan_Marsh, ??P19
- 14:29:43 [Zakim]
- -??P19
- 14:30:44 [Zakim]
- +Canon
- 14:31:27 [GlenD]
- GlenD has joined #ws-desc
- 14:32:18 [GlenD]
- hi Tony!
- 14:47:59 [youenn]
- youenn has joined #ws-desc
- 14:50:07 [Zakim]
- This conference is scheduled to end in 10 minutes; all ports must be freed
- 14:55:04 [Zakim]
- This conference is scheduled to end in 5 minutes; all ports must be freed
- 14:56:07 [Gil]
- Gil has joined #ws-desc
- 14:56:55 [Zakim]
- -Jonathan_Marsh
- 14:56:56 [Zakim]
- -Canon
- 14:56:59 [Zakim]
- -TonyR
- 14:57:00 [Zakim]
- WS_DescWG(WSDL)10:00AM has ended
- 14:57:01 [Zakim]
- Attendees were TonyR, Arthur_Ryman, Jonathan_Marsh, Canon
- 14:57:09 [Jonathan]
- Zakim, this is WS_Desc
- 14:57:09 [Zakim]
- "WS_Desc" matches WS_DescWG()11:00AM, and WS_DescWG(WSDL)10:00AM, Jonathan
- 14:57:44 [TonyR]
- zakim, this is wsdwg
- 14:57:44 [Zakim]
- ok, TonyR; that matches WS_DescWG()11:00AM
- 14:57:47 [Zakim]
- +Jonathan_Marsh
- 14:58:06 [Zakim]
- +Gilbert_Pilz
- 14:58:14 [Zakim]
- +??P17
- 14:58:23 [TonyR]
- zakim, ??p17 is me
- 14:58:23 [Zakim]
- +TonyR; got it
- 14:58:31 [TonyR]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 14:58:31 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Jonathan_Marsh, Gilbert_Pilz, TonyR
- 14:58:58 [Bozhong]
- Bozhong has joined #ws-desc
- 15:01:01 [Zakim]
- +??P13
- 15:01:30 [GlenD]
- GlenD has joined #ws-desc
- 15:01:33 [alewis]
- alewis has joined #ws-desc
- 15:02:03 [Zakim]
- -??P13
- 15:02:18 [Jonathan]
- RRSAgent, set log world
- 15:02:39 [Zakim]
- +Amelia_Lewis
- 15:02:45 [Zakim]
- +Arthur_Ryman
- 15:03:00 [Roberto]
- Roberto has joined #ws-desc
- 15:03:34 [Zakim]
- +??P4
- 15:03:36 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Chinnici
- 15:03:46 [Roberto]
- zakim, Roberto_Chinnici is me
- 15:03:46 [Zakim]
- +Roberto; got it
- 15:04:03 [Jonathan]
- Zakim, ??P4 is Bozhong
- 15:04:03 [Zakim]
- +Bozhong; got it
- 15:04:38 [JacekK]
- JacekK has joined #ws-desc
- 15:05:09 [Zakim]
- +[DERI]
- 15:05:17 [Allen]
- Allen has joined #ws-desc
- 15:05:45 [Roberto]
- scribe: Roberto
- 15:06:05 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: minutes are approved
- 15:06:19 [Roberto]
- Topic: review of action items
- 15:08:02 [Zakim]
- +??P39
- 15:08:18 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 15:08:28 [youenn]
- youenn has joined #ws-desc
- 15:08:57 [Allen]
- zakim, [IPcaller] is Allen
- 15:08:57 [Zakim]
- +Allen; got it
- 15:09:31 [Jonathan]
- Zakim, ??P39 is Youenn
- 15:09:31 [Zakim]
- +Youenn; got it
- 15:09:48 [Roberto]
- Topic: administrivia
- 15:10:18 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: next telcon July 20th
- 15:10:38 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: several people missing on July 27th
- 15:10:54 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: not heard back on the SPARQL wsdl bug
- 15:11:49 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: sees no reason for adding (d) to the issues list
- 15:12:10 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: got query from WS-I BP asking for requiredness of targetNamespace in wsdl 2.0
- 15:12:28 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: little traffic on the list on this issue
- 15:12:50 [Roberto]
- Arthur: related to code generation, where namespaces are mapped to packages
- 15:13:39 [Roberto]
- ... also a good idea to avoid naming conflicts and simplify things
- 15:13:46 [Roberto]
- ... WS-I should recommend it
- 15:14:05 [Roberto]
- Jacek: namespaces are goodness and WS-I should mandate them
- 15:14:59 [Roberto]
- Topic: interop event report
- 15:15:52 [Roberto]
- Arthur: very productive event, the test suite got x3 bigger
- 15:16:03 [Roberto]
- ... also got better reporting tools
- 15:16:24 [Roberto]
- ... need WG members to help fill the gaps in the test suite
- 15:17:11 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: test cases for broken assertions a priority
- 15:19:51 [Arthur]
- Arthur has joined #ws-desc
- 15:19:54 [Arthur]
- http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/assertions-report.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8
- 15:22:33 [Arthur]
- http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/
- 15:23:36 [Arthur]
- http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/test-suite.xml
- 15:25:32 [Arthur]
- here's the woden site: http://incubator.apache.org/woden/
- 15:31:00 [Jonathan]
- zakim, who's making noise
- 15:31:00 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'who's making noise', Jonathan
- 15:31:03 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: would like to have a new interop event in late September
- 15:31:08 [Jonathan]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 15:31:19 [Zakim]
- Jonathan, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Roberto (19%), Jonathan_Marsh (68%), Arthur_Ryman (40%), Gilbert_Pilz (5%)
- 15:32:25 [GlenD]
- GlenD has joined #ws-desc
- 15:32:26 [Roberto]
- Topic: issue CR044
- 15:34:04 [Roberto]
- Arthur: "implements" is a common word
- 15:34:26 [Roberto]
- TonyR: it's the endpoint that does the implementing, not the binding
- 15:35:09 [Roberto]
- Allen: how about "binds"?
- 15:36:50 [Roberto]
- Roberto: tried to avoid anything that conveyed a static relationship
- 15:37:01 [Jonathan]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 15:37:12 [Zakim]
- Jonathan, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Jonathan_Marsh (59%), [DERI] (5%)
- 15:37:38 [chad]
- chad has joined #ws-desc
- 15:37:43 [Jonathan]
- chad: new poll
- 15:37:43 [chad]
- new poll
- 15:37:53 [Jonathan]
- chad: question: terminology
- 15:37:59 [Jonathan]
- chad: option 1: applies
- 15:38:05 [Jonathan]
- chad: option 2: implements
- 15:38:11 [Jonathan]
- chad: option 3: binds
- 15:38:23 [Jonathan]
- Chad: option 1: is applied to
- 15:38:51 [Jonathan]
- chad: option 4: qualifies
- 15:39:50 [Jonathan]
- chad: question?
- 15:40:00 [Jonathan]
- chad: options?
- 15:40:32 [JacekK]
- vote: 1, 3
- 15:40:42 [Allen]
- vote: 3,1
- 15:40:45 [Arthur]
- vote: 3, 2, 1
- 15:40:47 [TonyR]
- vote: 4, 3, 1
- 15:41:01 [Gil]
- vote 4,3,1
- 15:41:07 [Jonathan]
- vote: 1, 2, 4, 3
- 15:41:16 [Gil]
- vote: 4,3,1
- 15:41:19 [youenn]
- vote: 1,2,3,4
- 15:41:26 [Roberto]
- vote: 1, 4, 2, 3
- 15:41:57 [Jonathan]
- chad, count
- 15:41:57 [chad]
- Question: terminology
- 15:41:57 [chad]
- Option 1: is applied to (4)
- 15:41:57 [chad]
- Option 2: implements (0)
- 15:41:57 [chad]
- Option 3: binds (2)
- 15:41:57 [chad]
- Option 4: qualifies (2)
- 15:41:58 [chad]
- 8 voters: Allen (3,1),Arthur (3,2,1),Gil (4,3,1),JacekK (1,3),Jonathan (1,2,4,3),Roberto (1,4,2,3),TonyR (4,3,1),youenn (1,2,3,4)
- 15:42:01 [chad]
- Round 1: Count of first place rankings.
- 15:42:03 [chad]
- Round 2: First elimination round.
- 15:42:05 [chad]
- Eliminating candidadates without any votes.
- 15:42:07 [chad]
- Eliminating candidate 2.
- 15:42:09 [chad]
- Round 3: Tie when choosing candidate to eliminate.
- 15:42:11 [chad]
- Tie at round 2 between 3, 4.
- 15:42:13 [chad]
- Tie at round 1 between 3, 4.
- 15:42:15 [chad]
- Tie broken randomly.
- 15:42:17 [chad]
- Eliminating candidate 4.
- 15:42:19 [chad]
- Round 4: Tie when choosing candidate to eliminate.
- 15:42:21 [chad]
- Tie at round 3 between 1, 3.
- 15:42:23 [chad]
- Candidate 3 has the fewest votes at round 2.
- 15:42:25 [chad]
- Eliminating candidate 3.
- 15:42:27 [chad]
- Candidate 1 is elected.
- 15:42:29 [chad]
- Winner is option 1 - is applied to
- 15:42:39 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: option 1 wins
- 15:43:40 [Roberto]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Jul/0057.html
- 15:45:16 [Roberto]
- jacek: wants to avoid interpreting these properties as component properties
- 15:45:39 [Roberto]
- ... the proposed text doesn't do that
- 15:47:09 [Roberto]
- ... describing his proposal (.7)
- 15:52:20 [Roberto]
- ACTION: Roberto to produce an updated proposal for CR044
- 15:52:57 [Jonathan]
- Topic: CR070
- 15:53:58 [Roberto]
- Roberto: that was the intent of the spec
- 15:54:00 [Zakim]
- -Gilbert_Pilz
- 15:54:11 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: no objections to approving the proposal
- 15:54:31 [Roberto]
- RESOLUTION: proposed solution to cr070 accepted
- 15:54:41 [Roberto]
- Topic: CR071
- 15:55:53 [Jonathan]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 15:55:56 [Zakim]
- +Gilbert_Pilz
- 15:56:03 [Zakim]
- Jonathan, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Roberto (24%), Jonathan_Marsh (30%), Arthur_Ryman (10%), Allen (4%)
- 15:56:05 [Roberto]
- Roberto: proposes to close with no action
- 15:58:37 [Zakim]
- -Allen
- 16:00:24 [Roberto]
- RESOLUTION: closed with no change to the spec
- 16:00:27 [Roberto]
- Topic: CR072
- 16:03:02 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: first part of the message is CR055
- 16:03:38 [Roberto]
- Arthur: the property won't be present unless the extension is known
- 16:03:54 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: so this issue seems to be a duplicate of CR050
- 16:05:13 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: last part of the issue is a typo
- 16:05:17 [Roberto]
- Arthur: it's already fixed
- 16:05:58 [Roberto]
- RESOLUTION: close CR072 as duplicate
- 16:06:05 [Roberto]
- Topic: CR074
- 16:07:04 [Roberto]
- Arthur: the rule was that we wouldn't duplicate constraints already enforced by the (normative) schema
- 16:07:47 [Roberto]
- ... we could also leave them in and add them to a special "enforced" class
- 16:08:18 [Roberto]
- Roberto: prefers consistency
- 16:08:24 [Roberto]
- TonyR: +1
- 16:09:03 [Roberto]
- Jacek: Remove "MUST"
- 16:10:44 [Roberto]
- Arthur: if you are constructing a component model without a document, there are many more constraints you risk violating
- 16:11:14 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: minimal change is to remove the assertion markup as change "MUST" to "is"
- 16:11:59 [Roberto]
- (actually, "MUST be" to "is")
- 16:13:42 [Roberto]
- RESOLUTION: close CR074 and fix those assertions by removing the assertion markup and changing "MUST be" to "is"
- 16:14:46 [Roberto]
- Topic: CR073
- 16:15:14 [Roberto]
- Arthur: proposal is to split sentences so that each MUST is its own assertion
- 16:16:01 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #1 is a small grammatical change (adding some commas)
- 16:16:20 [Roberto]
- s/grammatical/punctuation/
- 16:16:42 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #1 accepted
- 16:16:58 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #2 is a single sentence with two MUST and MUST NOT but one assertion
- 16:17:29 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #2, #3 accepted
- 16:20:00 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: for #4 the proposal is to split the first sentence in two and drop the last one
- 16:20:05 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #4 approved
- 16:20:17 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #5 is simply splitting in two
- 16:20:22 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #5 approved
- 16:21:08 [Roberto]
- RESOLUTION: close CR073, accept all changes and additionally split the first sentence in item #4 of the proposal
- 16:21:15 [Roberto]
- Topic: CR075
- 16:21:24 [JacekK]
- JacekK has joined #ws-desc
- 16:21:50 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #1 proposal is changing the assertion markup
- 16:23:23 [Roberto]
- Arthur: make "MAY" into a "may"
- 16:23:31 [Roberto]
- ... and add "Note that" at the beginning
- 16:25:12 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #1 adopted with Arthur's amendment
- 16:25:53 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #2 is rewording the part with "MAY" and make the other sentence a separate assertion
- 16:26:39 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: #2 approved
- 16:28:52 [Roberto]
- Roberto: last bullet point in 4.2 has two assertions too
- 16:29:26 [Roberto]
- Jonathan: we could insert "furthermore" before the "MUST NOT" and mark it up as two assertions
- 16:31:26 [Roberto]
- RESOLUTION: close CR075, approve the suggestions with Arthur's amendment, have the editors also fix the last bullet in 4.2
- 16:33:09 [Zakim]
- -Amelia_Lewis
- 16:33:10 [Zakim]
- -Arthur_Ryman
- 16:33:10 [Zakim]
- -Youenn
- 16:33:11 [Zakim]
- -Roberto
- 16:33:13 [Zakim]
- -[DERI]
- 16:33:15 [Zakim]
- -Gilbert_Pilz
- 16:33:18 [Zakim]
- -Jonathan_Marsh
- 16:33:19 [Zakim]
- -TonyR
- 16:33:20 [Jonathan]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 16:33:20 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ws-desc-minutes.html Jonathan
- 16:33:22 [Gil]
- Gil has left #ws-desc
- 16:33:33 [alewis]
- alewis has left #ws-desc
- 16:35:04 [TonyR]
- TonyR has left #ws-desc
- 16:37:35 [Jonathan]
- zakim, bye
- 16:37:35 [Zakim]
- leaving. As of this point the attendees were Jonathan_Marsh, Gilbert_Pilz, TonyR, Amelia_Lewis, Arthur_Ryman, Roberto, Bozhong, [DERI], Allen, Youenn
- 16:37:35 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #ws-desc
- 16:37:51 [Jonathan]
- Meeting: WS Description telcon
- 16:37:57 [Jonathan]
- Chair: Jonathan
- 16:38:11 [Jonathan]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 16:38:11 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ws-desc-minutes.html Jonathan
- 16:48:20 [sanjiva_]
- sanjiva_ has joined #ws-desc