See also: IRC log
<ericP> scribe: bns
<ericP> PROPOSED: accept http://www.w3.org/2006/07/18-semann-minutes as a true record of the last meeting
<ericP> APPROVED
<ericP> ACTION: EricP and JacekK to draft an RDF mapping section for SAWSDL [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/07/25-semann-minutes.html#action01]
<ericP> ACTION: EricP to add text gravy to his annotated Amazon WSDL and put it in Examples document [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/07/25-semann-minutes.html#action02]
<ericP> ACTION: Rama to come up with a text explaining "best practice" for the categorization issue [CONTINUED]
<ericP> ACTION: Rama to ask Laura to send the Telecom Italia UC document to the group [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/07/25-semann-minutes.html#action03]
no action item is needed to keep track of progress
<ericP> ACTION: Joel to update definitions in the document [DONE]
rama: to send comments to claudio
<ericP> F2F registration
joel: issues that remains is 1
and that is "applying model reference to operations" does not
support extensibility elemets
... element extensibility is an option
... element extensibility and model reference could both be
used
ericP: any attribute that can be
optional?
... 1.1 extends the semants of 1.1 operations to allow the
attribute extension
joel: would we call it a model reference? anybody has objections?
ericP: we keep the attribute extensions and do something like this:
<operation ... ><sawsdl:attrExtensions sawsdl:modelReference="..."/>...</operation>
ericP: keep the same encoding
<ericP> PROPOSED: add WSDL1.1 operation modelReferences via this XML syntax: <operation ... ><sawsdl:attrExtensions sawsdl:modelReference="..."/>...</operation> [APPROVED]
john: you can specify that two schemas are depricated
<ericP> new issue from Rama
rama: categorization of a
particular interface using same model reference, all the
operations on that interface would be categorized at the level
of interface
... do we also want to say something about the abilities?
... example purchaseOrder, for example, is the interface and
monitor purchase order could be an operation on that
interface
ericP: its not an extension, but a different interface
joel: all applies rule should work at model reference
<ericP> +1
claudio: there are some
situations such as IT Service provider, which can, for any
reason, perform different operations
... recommends to keep extentions at operations level
joel: unaware of any case where any case is categorized as portTypes, you can't just publish operations
john: no sure if there is incompatibility, all applies is still the best practice
ericP: Semantic Web recomments not to write anything that later contradics
rama: we can't prevent people from extending both operations and interface
joel: if we have ModelReference on a Operation how to distinguish categorization from something else
john: relevancy applies universally, nothing is normative, an example would clarify
joel: editors to take care based on the input from Rama
rama: some of the requirements
are not explicitly in scope of SAWSDL, especially those related
to preconditions and effects
... WSDL that are provided are long, don't think we need such a
long WSDL to clarify the usability in example document
... suggests to use snippets and use pointers to the actual
document
claudio: there are more than what
is needed, coming from own experiences, we can sharp it down to
the scope of the WG
... the operations provided are the standard interfaces
provided by parley-x
rama: it is a valuable to annotate real industrial stuffs, but example document may not be the right place to do so
<carlos> +1
claudio: agrees to make it simpler
<ericP> ADJOURNED