<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?

<TonyR> Tony & Jonathan: yes, it is invalid (in the context)

<TonyR> Arthur: if, on the other hand, it is marked wsdl:required=false, is it valid?

<TonyR> Tony & Jonathan: yes, it is valid (unless otherwise invalid)

<TonyR> Arthur: just deciding where to put the test cases

<TonyR> Arthur: might be a good idea to issue a warning when encountering a unrecognised extension (even with required=false)

<TonyR> action item Arthur test cases for message exchanges from a simple WSDL - done

<GlenD> hi Tony!

<scribe> scribe: Roberto

Jonathan: minutes are approved

review of action items

administrivia

Jonathan: next telcon July 20th
... several people missing on July 27th
... not heard back on the SPARQL wsdl bug
... sees no reason for adding (d) to the issues list
... got query from WS-I BP asking for requiredness of targetNamespace in wsdl 2.0
... little traffic on the list on this issue

Arthur: related to code generation, where namespaces are mapped to packages
... also a good idea to avoid naming conflicts and simplify things
... WS-I should recommend it

Jacek: namespaces are goodness and WS-I should mandate them

interop event report

Arthur: very productive event, the test suite got x3 bigger
... also got better reporting tools
... need WG members to help fill the gaps in the test suite

Jonathan: test cases for broken assertions a priority

<Arthur> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/assertions-report.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8

<Arthur> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/

<Arthur> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/test-suite.xml

<Arthur> here's the woden site: http://incubator.apache.org/woden/

Jonathan: would like to have a new interop event in late September

issue CR044

Arthur: "implements" is a common word

TonyR: it's the endpoint that does the implementing, not the binding

Allen: how about "binds"?

Roberto: tried to avoid anything that conveyed a static relationship

<Jonathan> chad: new poll

<chad> new poll

<Jonathan> chad: question: terminology

<Jonathan> chad: option 1: applies

<Jonathan> chad: option 2: implements

<Jonathan> chad: option 3: binds

<Jonathan> Chad: option 1: is applied to

<Jonathan> chad: option 4: qualifies

<Jonathan> chad: question?

<Jonathan> chad: options?

<JacekK> vote: 1, 3

<Allen> vote: 3,1

<Arthur> vote: 3, 2, 1

<TonyR> vote: 4, 3, 1

<Gil> vote 4,3,1

<Jonathan> vote: 1, 2, 4, 3

<Gil> vote: 4,3,1

<youenn> vote: 1,2,3,4

vote: 1, 4, 2, 3

<Jonathan> chad, count

<chad> Question: terminology

<chad> Option 1: is applied to (4)

<chad> Option 2: implements (0)

<chad> Option 3: binds (2)

<chad> Option 4: qualifies (2)

<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)

<chad> Round 1: Count of first place rankings.

<chad> Round 2: First elimination round.

<chad> Eliminating candidadates without any votes.

<chad> Eliminating candidate 2.

<chad> Round 3: Tie when choosing candidate to eliminate.

<chad> Tie at round 2 between 3, 4.

<chad> Tie at round 1 between 3, 4.

<chad> Tie broken randomly.

<chad> Eliminating candidate 4.

<chad> Round 4: Tie when choosing candidate to eliminate.

<chad> Tie at round 3 between 1, 3.

<chad> Candidate 3 has the fewest votes at round 2.

<chad> Eliminating candidate 3.

<chad> Candidate 1 is elected.

<chad> Winner is option 1 - is applied to

Jonathan: option 1 wins

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Jul/0057.html

jacek: wants to avoid interpreting these properties as component properties
... the proposed text doesn't do that
... describing his proposal (.7)

<scribe> ACTION: Roberto to produce an updated proposal for CR044 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]

CR070

Roberto: that was the intent of the spec

Jonathan: no objections to approving the proposal

RESOLUTION: proposed solution to cr070 accepted

CR071

Roberto: proposes to close with no action

RESOLUTION: closed with no change to the spec

CR072

Jonathan: first part of the message is CR055

Arthur: the property won't be present unless the extension is known

Jonathan: so this issue seems to be a duplicate of CR050
... last part of the issue is a typo

Arthur: it's already fixed

RESOLUTION: close CR072 as duplicate

CR074

Arthur: the rule was that we wouldn't duplicate constraints already enforced by the (normative) schema
... we could also leave them in and add them to a special "enforced" class

Roberto: prefers consistency

TonyR: +1

Jacek: Remove "MUST"

Arthur: if you are constructing a component model without a document, there are many more constraints you risk violating

Jonathan: minimal change is to remove the assertion markup as change "MUST" to "is"

(actually, "MUST be" to "is")

RESOLUTION: close CR074 and fix those assertions by removing the assertion markup and changing "MUST be" to "is"

CR073

Arthur: proposal is to split sentences so that each MUST is its own assertion

Jonathan: #1 is a small punctuation change (adding some commas)
... #1 accepted
... #2 is a single sentence with two MUST and MUST NOT but one assertion
... #2, #3 accepted
... for #4 the proposal is to split the first sentence in two and drop the last one
... #4 approved
... #5 is simply splitting in two
... #5 approved

RESOLUTION: close CR073, accept all changes and additionally split the first sentence in item #4 of the proposal

CR075

Jonathan: #1 proposal is changing the assertion markup

Arthur: make "MAY" into a "may"
... and add "Note that" at the beginning

Jonathan: #1 adopted with Arthur's amendment
... #2 is rewording the part with "MAY" and make the other sentence a separate assertion
... #2 approved

Roberto: last bullet point in 4.2 has two assertions too

Jonathan: we could insert "furthermore" before the "MUST NOT" and mark it up as two assertions

RESOLUTION: close CR075, approve the suggestions with Arthur's amendment, have the editors also fix the last bullet in 4.2

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/grammatical/punctuation/
Found Scribe: Roberto
Inferring ScribeNick: Roberto

WARNING: Replacing list of attendees.
Old list: TonyR Arthur_Ryman Jonathan_Marsh Canon
New list: Jonathan_Marsh Gilbert_Pilz TonyR Amelia_Lewis Arthur_Ryman Roberto Bozhong [DERI] Allen Youenn

Default Present: Jonathan_Marsh, Gilbert_Pilz, TonyR, Amelia_Lewis, Arthur_Ryman, Roberto, Bozhong, [DERI], Allen, Youenn
Present: Jonathan_Marsh Gilbert_Pilz TonyR Amelia_Lewis Arthur_Ryman Roberto Bozhong [DERI] Allen Youenn
Got date from IRC log name: 13 Jul 2006
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ws-desc-minutes.html
People with action items: roberto