IRC log of ws-desc on 2006-10-05
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:56:52 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #ws-desc
- 14:56:52 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/10/05-ws-desc-irc
- 14:56:56 [TomJ]
- TomJ has joined #ws-desc
- 14:56:59 [Jonathan]
- RRSAgent, set log world
- 14:57:08 [Jonathan]
- Meeting: WS Description WG telcon
- 14:57:11 [Jonathan]
- chair: Jonathan
- 14:58:36 [gpilz]
- gpilz has joined #ws-desc
- 14:59:34 [Zakim]
- +Plh
- 14:59:37 [Zakim]
- +Gilbert_Pilz
- 14:59:50 [Zakim]
- +Tom_Jordahl
- 15:00:09 [Zakim]
- +Jonathan_Marsh
- 15:00:23 [Zakim]
- +??P9
- 15:01:21 [Vivek]
- Vivek has joined #ws-desc
- 15:01:21 [Roberto]
- Roberto has joined #ws-desc
- 15:01:55 [Zakim]
- +Roberto
- 15:01:55 [TonyR]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:01:56 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see TonyR, Plh, Gilbert_Pilz, Tom_Jordahl, Jonathan_Marsh, ??P9, Roberto
- 15:02:11 [Zakim]
- +Peter_Zehler
- 15:02:37 [Zakim]
- +Vivek_Pandey
- 15:02:45 [Zakim]
- +Arthur_Ryman
- 15:02:56 [JacekK]
- JacekK has joined #ws-desc
- 15:03:07 [Zakim]
- +Anish_Karmarkar
- 15:03:14 [Zakim]
- +Allen_Brookes
- 15:03:30 [Zakim]
- +Charlton_Barreto
- 15:03:32 [Arthur]
- Arthur has joined #ws-desc
- 15:03:39 [Z]
- Z has joined #ws-desc
- 15:03:53 [TonyR]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:03:53 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see TonyR, Plh, Gilbert_Pilz, Tom_Jordahl, Jonathan_Marsh, ??P9, Roberto, Peter_Zehler, Vivek_Pandey, Arthur_Ryman, Anish_Karmarkar, Allen_Brookes, Charlton_Barreto
- 15:03:56 [charlton]
- charlton has joined #ws-desc
- 15:04:03 [Zakim]
- -??P9
- 15:05:05 [plh]
- Regrets: PaulD, Youenn
- 15:05:47 [Zakim]
- +Canon
- 15:06:01 [Zakim]
- +Amelia_Lewis
- 15:06:15 [jjm]
- jjm has joined #ws-desc
- 15:06:30 [jjm]
- zakim, Canon holds Jean-Jacques
- 15:06:30 [Zakim]
- +Jean-Jacques; got it
- 15:06:50 [Zakim]
- -Allen_Brookes
- 15:06:55 [alewis]
- alewis has joined #ws-desc
- 15:07:07 [alewis]
- SCRIBE: alewis
- 15:07:14 [alewis]
- TOPIC: approval of minutes
- 15:07:53 [alewis]
- minutes approved 28 September 2006 teleconference
- 15:07:59 [alewis]
- TOPIC: Action items
- 15:08:14 [alewis]
- (quickly reviewed)
- 15:09:18 [alewis]
- Jonathan: no longer affiliated with Microsoft, now with WSO2, will continue on working group, as co-chair and WSO2 representative
- 15:09:25 [Zakim]
- +??P31
- 15:09:47 [alewis]
- ... Asir continues to represent Microsoft (currently on paternity leave)
- 15:11:14 [alewis]
- (chaffer targeting Jonathan and Asir and Arthur)
- 15:15:04 [Jonathan]
- Jonathan's new email address: jonathan@wso2.com
- 15:15:49 [alewis]
- TOPIC: Administrivia
- 15:15:57 [alewis]
- Interop event, November 14-18
- 15:16:30 [alewis]
- ... Canon to host.
- 15:17:20 [alewis]
- ... location of interop event is Rennes, France
- 15:18:17 [alewis]
- ... more administrivia: should we review the change from x-www-url-encoded to www-url-encoded, approaching submission in IETF.
- 15:18:34 [alewis]
- Jonathan: do we need to review this, or make specification changes?
- 15:18:49 [alewis]
- little interest or concern expressed.
- 15:18:55 [alewis]
- TOPIC: features at risk
- 15:19:32 [alewis]
- ... features and properties awaiting submission from Youenn on MTOM (CR62). Discussion awaits fulfillment of action item.
- 15:21:37 [alewis]
- ... is there anything other than Youenn's action that we're waiting for to make the decision on Features and Properties?
- 15:22:36 [alewis]
- Phillippe: SOAP modules may also be linked to removal of features and properties, since based on that.
- 15:22:59 [alewis]
- Jonathan: Glen modified that statement, to say that the functionality is less than ideal, but still usable.
- 15:23:27 [plh]
- s/Phillippe/Philippe/
- 15:23:28 [alewis]
- ... Arthur is suggesting that we need to make the Features and Properties decision next week, when we've seen Youenn's proposal.
- 15:24:10 [alewis]
- TOPIC: CR80, canonical component designators.
- 15:24:40 [Arthur]
- q+
- 15:24:43 [alewis]
- Jonathan: is the purpose of component designators furthered by having canonical designators?
- 15:25:48 [alewis]
- Jacek: yes, these can be useful to RDF and web arch generally, but ought to be "SHOULD" rather than "MUST".
- 15:26:27 [alewis]
- Jonathan: someone needs to write up the canonical form of XPointer URIs for component designators
- 15:26:43 [alewis]
- ... might be restricted to namespaces and such.
- 15:27:16 [alewis]
- ... canonical XPointer format might have utility outside of this group.
- 15:27:20 [Zakim]
- +??P13
- 15:27:34 [Allen]
- zakim, ??P13 is Allen
- 15:27:34 [Zakim]
- +Allen; got it
- 15:29:27 [alewis]
- ... fragment identifiers are too restrictive; component designators should be more sharply targeted. Should be able to use a component designator as a fragment identifier, but not necessarily the other way around.
- 15:30:08 [alewis]
- Jacek: anyone using fragment identifiers knows how to use them, as a rule.
- 15:30:25 [alewis]
- Arthur: but in RDF, these things need to be opaque, comparable URIs
- 15:30:58 [alewis]
- Jacek: yes, but it's unlikely that two different sources will generate fragment identifiers from the same WSDL and then need to compare them.
- 15:31:09 [Zakim]
- -Peter_Zehler
- 15:31:13 [alewis]
- Jacek: it would be nice to have canonical designators, but is not critical.
- 15:32:10 [alewis]
- Jonathan: add a paragraph to spec. "For easy lexical comparison of fragment identifiers ..." (he needs to put the rest of this in an email, probably)
- 15:32:52 [alewis]
- discussion of how to generate namespace prefixes, as applied to the problem of canonicalization.
- 15:33:16 [alewis]
- Arthur: does this also require that the base URI be canonicalized?
- 15:33:30 [Jonathan]
- - only 0 to two xmlns() and exactly 1 wsdl.*() pointer parts may appear
- 15:33:31 [alewis]
- Jonathan: we start from a target URI, which is lexically defined.
- 15:33:43 [Jonathan]
- - prefixes must be named ns1, ns2
- 15:33:49 [Jonathan]
- - no whitespace appears in the XPointer
- 15:34:01 [Jonathan]
- - no duplicate URIs in xmlns()
- 15:34:05 [alewis]
- Arthur: true for WSDL, but we also have schema URIs.
- 15:34:14 [alewis]
- Jonathan, Jacek: same thing.
- 15:34:45 [Jonathan]
- - multipe xmlns() parts appear in the same order as in the wsdl.* part
- 15:35:02 [alewis]
- Arthur: if namespace recurs, reuse prefix.
- 15:35:28 [Jonathan]
- s/0 to two/0 or more/
- 15:36:09 [alewis]
- Jonathan: are these rules sufficient for the case of an extension?
- 15:36:09 [Jonathan]
- s/multipe/multiple/
- 15:36:32 [Zakim]
- -Anish_Karmarkar
- 15:36:38 [alewis]
- Arthur: yes, the frag id is a string, so has an inherent left-to-right order. name them in order of occurrence.
- 15:37:33 [Jonathan]
- "For ease of comparison, Component Designators SHOULD conform to the following canonicalization rules."
- 15:37:39 [alewis]
- ACTION: Arthur to revise appendix to include this text.
- 15:38:13 [alewis]
- Arthur: WS-Policy will also use these fragment ids.
- 15:38:24 [chinthaka]
- chinthaka has joined #ws-desc
- 15:39:54 [alewis]
- RESOLVED: CR80 closed with the addition of a statement recommending canonical construction of URLs representing fragment ids.
- 15:40:38 [Jonathan]
- note that the use of must within SHOULD is not very nice
- 15:40:55 [alewis]
- Arthur: maybe also revise the examples in the specification using the canonical form?
- 15:41:54 [alewis]
- Jonathan: one more issue on list, from 2004, note from TAG on safety extension. TAG wants to track usage through deployment.
- 15:42:17 [alewis]
- ... suggest that at some point he can report implementation to the TAG.
- 15:42:26 [alewis]
- ... Woden and Canon currently implement.
- 15:42:47 [alewis]
- Arthur: can WSDL claim that something is safe when it isn't?
- 15:43:18 [alewis]
- Jacek: planning to use this information in research; although no implementation, it's very useful in its present form.
- 15:44:41 [alewis]
- Tom: reads this as looking for clarification on what "safe" means.
- 15:45:00 [alewis]
- Arthur: maybe we need to say that "read-only" is not enough, it needs to have no side effects.
- 15:45:08 [alewis]
- Jonathan: but we don't want to define it.
- 15:45:20 [alewis]
- ... point to canonical definition.
- 15:45:31 [alewis]
- Tom: can't we just add a couple sentences?
- 15:45:41 [alewis]
- Jonathan: no, they want something in the test suite.
- 15:46:12 [alewis]
- Tom: "we called launchNuclearWeapons twice, and it wasn't safe even though it was marked that way!"
- 15:46:46 [alewis]
- Arthur: can put banking-type example in test suite (getBalance is safe, makeDeposit is not)
- 15:47:05 [alewis]
- question: are there examples in the primer? Is this the best place to do it?
- 15:47:44 [alewis]
- Arthur: there's discussion in the primer, maybe Jonathan should point the TAG at the primer on interface operation.
- 15:48:50 [alewis]
- Jonathan: yes, this text looks pretty good. Reluctant to do more, except eventually ping the TAG again to say "still there, seems to be working, no internet-scale deployment at this time, but no reason to expect misuse"
- 15:49:11 [alewis]
- Arthur: is it generally an error if an operation is bound to HTTP DELETE and it's marked as safe?
- 15:49:29 [alewis]
- Arthur: can we check that in validation?
- 15:49:34 [alewis]
- Philippe: no.
- 15:49:47 [alewis]
- Arthur: sure we can, if we know the binding.
- 15:49:49 [alewis]
- q+
- 15:50:05 [alewis]
- Philippe: only GET is safe.
- 15:50:19 [alewis]
- Jacek: what is guaranteed to be *unsafe*?
- 15:51:35 [alewis]
- Amy: is there an assertion about usage of HTTP methods in the WSDL HTTP binding?
- 15:52:11 [alewis]
- Joanathan, Arthur: well, we should be able to work it out from the combination of the HTTP spec and the definition of safety.
- 15:52:43 [alewis]
- Arthur: yes, but we could put the assertion in, in order to have a test case that clearly violates an assertion (and is therefore invalid).
- 15:53:18 [pauld]
- DELETE is unsafe
- 15:53:32 [alewis]
- discussion of whether a WSDL can be called invalid if it does not violate a direct assertion. can validity be based on implicit violation of the safety attribute?
- 15:54:34 [alewis]
- discussion of which methods are guaranteed unsafe.
- 15:54:56 [alewis]
- paul says delete is; jonathan suggests not (if there's a nonexistent resource, for instance).
- 15:55:33 [alewis]
- Arthur: and there is no guarantee that an application will implement the HTTP verbs properly.
- 15:56:07 [alewis]
- Jacek, Arthur: we can point them to the primer, and point out that it's not in the test suite.
- 15:56:38 [alewis]
- Jonathan: the issue will be resolved via a report to the TAG, the longer we wait, the more implementation experience we can report on.
- 15:58:45 [alewis]
- Jonathan: substantially completed with work. we will have a call next week to talk about features and properties.
- 16:00:09 [alewis]
- NEW ISSUE: per email from Ramkumar Menon, question of fault binding raised in discussion of synchronous versus asynchronous.
- 16:00:34 [alewis]
- Jonathan: will add issue 81, and close it immediately by requiring fault binding.
- 16:00:55 [alewis]
- Jacek: faults outside operations don't need to have bindings.
- 16:00:55 [pauld]
- notes DELETE on a non-existent resource should return 404, not 200, 202, 204 and invalid implementations sounds bogus
- 16:01:26 [alewis]
- Jacek: uncomfortable with this MUST.
- 16:02:12 [alewis]
- ... maybe say it in the qualified version?
- 16:02:38 [Zakim]
- -Plh
- 16:02:43 [Jonathan]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:02:43 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see TonyR, Gilbert_Pilz, Tom_Jordahl, Jonathan_Marsh, Roberto, Vivek_Pandey, Arthur_Ryman, Charlton_Barreto, Canon, Amelia_Lewis, JacekK, Allen
- 16:02:46 [Zakim]
- Canon has Jean-Jacques
- 16:02:58 [alewis]
- Jonathan: maybe leave issue open for this week?
- 16:03:10 [alewis]
- ACTION: Jacek to send response email noting his concern.
- 16:03:31 [alewis]
- Arthur: in practice, you won't have a problem until you use a fault.
- 16:03:46 [alewis]
- Arthur: if something goes wrong, and you need to send a fault, you need to know how to bind it.
- 16:03:57 [alewis]
- Arthur: so there can be unused faults.
- 16:04:12 [alewis]
- Jacek: but what about faults that are defined, but not referenced from any operation?
- 16:04:34 [alewis]
- Jonathan: let's look at it; it doesn't sound controversial, just needs a little more thought.
- 16:04:41 [Jonathan]
- ACTION: Jonathan to add issue 81
- 16:04:51 [alewis]
- Arthur: yeah, probably happened when we pulled fault out of operation.
- 16:05:24 [alewis]
- Meeting closes.
- 16:06:18 [Arthur]
- assertion coverage report: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/assertions-report.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8
- 16:06:21 [alewis]
- implementors' report.
- 16:06:50 [alewis]
- 226 assertions, only 54 covered by test cases.
- 16:07:22 [alewis]
- Arthur: also invites people to contribute to Woden.
- 16:07:47 [Arthur]
- Woden project needs help: http://incubator.apache.org/woden/
- 16:07:53 [Zakim]
- -Canon
- 16:07:57 [Zakim]
- -Jonathan_Marsh
- 16:07:58 [Zakim]
- -Arthur_Ryman
- 16:07:59 [Zakim]
- -Allen
- 16:08:00 [Zakim]
- -TonyR
- 16:08:01 [Zakim]
- -Gilbert_Pilz
- 16:08:03 [Zakim]
- -Roberto
- 16:08:04 [Zakim]
- -Tom_Jordahl
- 16:08:05 [Zakim]
- -JacekK
- 16:08:35 [Zakim]
- -Vivek_Pandey
- 16:08:36 [Zakim]
- -Amelia_Lewis
- 16:08:49 [TonyR]
- TonyR has left #ws-desc
- 16:09:07 [JacekK]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:09:07 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/10/05-ws-desc-minutes.html JacekK
- 16:09:08 [TomJ]
- TomJ has left #ws-desc
- 16:09:13 [JacekK]
- rrsagent, make minutes member
- 16:09:13 [RRSAgent]
- I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes member', JacekK. Try /msg RRSAgent help
- 16:09:19 [JacekK]
- rrsagent, make log member
- 16:09:26 [charlton]
- rrsagent, format minutes
- 16:09:26 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/10/05-ws-desc-minutes.html charlton
- 16:09:53 [JacekK]
- the minutes are public, is that a problem?
- 16:10:21 [alewis]
- bye, gang.
- 16:10:27 [alewis]
- alewis has left #ws-desc
- 16:10:59 [Vivek]
- Vivek has left #ws-desc
- 16:11:06 [charlton]
- zakim, list participants
- 16:11:06 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been TonyR, Plh, Gilbert_Pilz, Tom_Jordahl, Jonathan_Marsh, Roberto, Peter_Zehler, Vivek_Pandey, Arthur_Ryman, Anish_Karmarkar, Allen_Brookes,
- 16:11:10 [Zakim]
- ... Charlton_Barreto, Amelia_Lewis, Jean-Jacques, JacekK, Allen
- 16:11:52 [charlton]
- Zakim, excuse us
- 16:11:52 [Zakim]
- leaving. As of this point the attendees were TonyR, Plh, Gilbert_Pilz, Tom_Jordahl, Jonathan_Marsh, Roberto, Peter_Zehler, Vivek_Pandey, Arthur_Ryman, Anish_Karmarkar,
- 16:11:52 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #ws-desc
- 16:11:55 [Zakim]
- ... Allen_Brookes, Charlton_Barreto, Amelia_Lewis, Jean-Jacques, JacekK, Allen
- 16:25:18 [Jonathan]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:25:18 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/10/05-ws-desc-minutes.html Jonathan
- 16:25:42 [Jonathan]
- RRSAgent, set log world
- 16:25:46 [Jonathan]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:25:46 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/10/05-ws-desc-minutes.html Jonathan
- 17:25:38 [sanjiva]
- sanjiva has joined #ws-desc