WS Description WG telcon

1 Mar 2007

See also: IRC log


Roland_Merrick, Jonathan, Ruchith_Fernando, TonyR, [Canon]




<Jonathan> Not till after the calls.

<Jonathan> OK.

<Jonathan> anything to report?

<TonyR> wsdwg

<scribe> Scribe: Tomj

Approval of minutes

Minutes are approved with no comments

Review of Action items

Jonathan reviews his completed actions

Others are not in attendance

CR issues

Issue CR147: RFC: operation safety as semantic annotation?


Jack: Tag wants this to be doable.
... Tag does not have a preference on where the work is done, WSDL is fine
... Prefers that the extension be removed from WSDL

Tomj: Asks for clarification of issue

Jack: SAWSDL seems like a better place to add the safety

Roberto: Does saWSDL have something we can use today?

Jack: there are hooks available
... We would move WSDL 2.0 safety to saWSDL spec
... a more suitable group to handle

TomJ: doesn't like the syntax, makes it more complex

<asir> Tom, are you using the safety feature?

No, I am not using it

Jack: Explains to Tom how implementation might work

Roberto: The default behavior in the HTTP binding is a good thing - REST people in particular might like it

Jonathan: agrees that safety does help REST

Jack: saWSDL would specify this in a cleaner way.

Tomj: Does see a complelling reason to remove it from WSDL just because another spec could specify it

Jonathan: saWSDL can use the WSDL2 safety attribute

Janathan: Can we leave the status quo?

Tony: Yes

Jack: Does not object

Jonathan: Any objects to closing CR 147 with no further action? NO

RESOLUTION: Close CR147 with no action

Issue CR021: Re: WSDL describing Interface operation safety


Jonathan: Feels we have fulfilled this action - tracked through CR

<alewis> +1

Janathan: Proposes we declare success on this

various +1s


<scribe> ACTION: Jonathan report back to the TAG with status on safety [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/01-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]

Issue CR157: RE: LocationTemplate-1G test


Jonathan: Any objections to adopting the editorial improvements in the issue? No

Question 1: character encoding

Jonathan: Proposal is to do nothing

Tomj: Implicit assumption that characters the MAY be encoded can be encoded

Question 2: Is this clear in the spec?

Tony; Seems like a test suite problem its doing a dumb comparison not a smart one

Discussion about the test suite and how it should behave

Tony: believes nothing wrong with the spec.

Youenn: Its safer to say that you MUST encode characters
... should make encoding the default with a SHOULD

Discussion about how and why to encode characters

<jkaputin_> reserved = gen-delims / sub-delims

<jkaputin_> gen-delims = ":" / "/" / "?" / "#" / "[" / "]" / "@"

<jkaputin_> sub-delims = "!" / "$" / "&" / "'" / "(" / ")"

<jkaputin_> / "*" / "+" / "," / ";" / "="

<Jonathan> The characters in the range: ALPHA | DIGIT | "-" | "." | "_" | "~"

Proposal: Split the list and move everything after the ~ to a SHOULD section

<Jonathan> "!" | "$" | "'" | "(" | ")" | "*" | "+" | "," | ";" | "=" | ":" | "@" | "?" | "/"

No other comments?

Jonathan: Any objects to adopting the proposal? NO

RESOLUTION: Split the character encoding table to address questions 2 in CR 157

Question 3: Editorial improvements will be adopted

Question 4: Is "&" a harmful character before the "?". If not, we should

add it to the excluded list.

Jonathan: Any object to adding "&" in to the list of SHOULD characters? NO

Question 5: Are ";" and "=" harmful characters before the "?". If so, we

should remove them from the excluded list.

Any objections to doing nothing as they are already in the SHOULD list? NO

<Jonathan> telling me the code isn't valide.

CR156: Query parameter separator value


<youenn> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Feb/0216.html

Youenn: explains the issue

Tony: Any comments? (chirp chirp of crickets...)
... Recommend that ; and & be added as as the seperated chars

<Jonathan> [a-zA-Z0-9\-\._~!$&amp;'\(\):@/\?\*\+,;]{1,1}

<TonyR> RESOLUTION: accept to close CR156 Jonathan's proposal, as modified by Jacek, with the addition of a NOTE as requested by Youenn (NOTE: semicolon and ampersand most commonly accepted separators)

<Jonathan> [&amp;;a-zA-Z0-9\-\._~!$'\(\):@/\?\*\+,]{1,1}

CR155: Proposal for Assertion InterfaceMessageReference-0042

jonathan: proposes to put it in errata list

Jack: Add errata before we ship?

Jonathan: Yes, it doesn't affect the spec in a meaningful way

RESOLUTION: Put this issue on our errata list

Document Status

<asir> Jonathan, am wondering if you have to replace the &amp; entity ref with a character reference

Jonathan: working group needs to vote to PR
... Editorial status looks good
... Primer is ready
... Must build set of documents with new namespace
... implementation status looks good, lots of green for interchange,
... message level tests are about as green as they are going to get
... should be good enough to proceed
... Proposes to take a vote to go to PR contingent on the interop report being updated.

<alewis> tibco +1

+1 to vote

<monica1> wow!

<monica1> :>)

<jkaputin_> woo hoo (for Arthur)

No objections to moving to PR

SOAP 1.1 binding, RDF Maping and Additional MEPs

Do we have permission to publish these three documents as working drafts?

<Jonathan> RESOLUTION: Move Primer, Part 1 and Part 2 to PR.

No objections to publishing extra documents as working drafts at the same time as we do the PR?

No objections

<monica1> sigh

future telcons

implementors calls will be on demand

Next weeks telcon is on, but will hopefully be canceled if no problems.

<TonyR> No implementor's call next week

discussion about how errata will be handled after WSDL goes away (June 2007).

Jonathan: Idea of having a WS-core group that will handle issues for WSDL and other specs.

Congratulations on Shipping the spec!!!

Finally done

almost 5 years of effort are complete

<monica1> congrats!

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Jonathan report back to the TAG with status on safety [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/01-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.128 (CVS log)
$Date: 2007/03/01 17:36:17 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128  of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/;/:/
Succeeded: s/Youen/Youenn/
Succeeded: s/accept Jonathan's/accept to close CR156 Jonathan's/
Succeeded: s/shuold/should/
Succeeded: s/Jonanthan/Jonathan/
Found Scribe: Tomj
Inferring ScribeNick: TomJ
Default Present: Roland_Merrick, Jonathan, Ruchith_Fernando, TonyR, [Canon]
Present: Roland_Merrick Jonathan Ruchith_Fernando TonyR [Canon]
Got date from IRC log name: 1 Mar 2007
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/03/01-ws-desc-minutes.html
People with action items: back jonathan report

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]