IRC log of soap-jms on 2008-10-07

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:44:19 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #soap-jms
15:44:19 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-irc
15:44:21 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:44:21 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #soap-jms
15:44:23 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SJMS
15:44:23 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM scheduled to start in 16 minutes
15:44:24 [trackbot]
Meeting: SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Teleconference
15:44:24 [trackbot]
Date: 07 October 2008
15:53:00 [rmerric]
rmerric has joined #soap-jms
15:53:24 [alewis]
alewis has joined #soap-jms
15:53:34 [rmerric]
rmerric has changed the topic to: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2008Oct/0000.html
15:53:35 [Phil]
Phil has joined #soap-jms
15:53:55 [rmerric]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2008Oct/0000.html
15:54:18 [rmerric]
Meeting: SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Teleconference
15:54:26 [Zakim]
WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM has now started
15:54:33 [Zakim]
+[IBM]
15:54:40 [Roland]
Roland has joined #soap-jms
15:54:44 [Phil]
Zakim, IBM is Phil
15:54:44 [Zakim]
+Phil; got it
15:55:08 [Roland]
Zakim, this will be WS_SOAP-JM
15:55:08 [Zakim]
ok, Roland, I see WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM already started
15:55:33 [Roland]
Zakim, this is WS_SOAP-JM
15:55:33 [Zakim]
Roland, this was already WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM
15:55:34 [Zakim]
ok, Roland; that matches WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM
15:56:21 [Zakim]
+Roland_Merrick
15:56:25 [Zakim]
-Phil
15:56:26 [Zakim]
+Phil
15:56:38 [Roland]
Zakim, Roland_Merrick is Roland
15:56:38 [Zakim]
+Roland; got it
15:56:53 [Roland]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:56:53 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-minutes.html Roland
15:57:03 [Roland]
rrsgagent, make log public
15:58:49 [Roland]
Chair: Roland
15:59:02 [Derek]
Derek has joined #soap-jms
15:59:17 [Roland]
Regrets: Mark, Bhakti
15:59:39 [Roland]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:59:39 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-minutes.html Roland
15:59:39 [Zakim]
+ +1.708.246.aaaa
15:59:57 [Roland]
Zakim, aaaa is Derek
15:59:57 [Zakim]
+Derek; got it
16:01:06 [peaston]
peaston has joined #soap-jms
16:01:12 [eric]
eric has joined #soap-jms
16:02:08 [Zakim]
+Peter_Easton
16:02:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.650.846.aabb
16:02:41 [eric]
Zakim, aabb is eric
16:02:41 [Zakim]
+eric; got it
16:02:58 [Zakim]
+Yves
16:03:18 [Zakim]
+ +1.919.742.aacc
16:04:59 [eric]
scribe: eric
16:05:21 [eric]
Topic: TextMessage
16:07:39 [eric]
eric: Since nobody objected to mark's email, that seems to be consensus about adopting Phil's proposal.
16:07:57 [eric]
... my action was in addition to that proposal - the concerns about using TextMessage.
16:07:58 [Roland]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2008Oct/0003.html
16:08:48 [eric]
eric walking us through the proposal...
16:09:43 [Yves]
issue is that base64 encoded in utf-16 is very inefficient
16:12:16 [eric]
eric: no normative statements in this proposal.
16:12:54 [eric]
roland: suggest that we put it in line, and see how it reads.
16:13:06 [eric]
... and then if we think it doesn't read well, move it to an appendix.
16:13:57 [eric]
eric: does anyone object to what I wrote...?
16:14:00 [eric]
(no objections)
16:14:24 [eric]
roland: I'll do the work of getting the text into the spec.
16:14:52 [eric]
action: Roland - put the just agreed-upon changes related to TextMessage into the spec (Phil's write up & Eric's writeup)
16:14:52 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-38 - - put the just agreed-upon changes related to TextMessage into the spec (Phil's write up & Eric's writeup) [on Roland Merrick - due 2008-10-14].
16:15:21 [Roland]
Topic: actions
16:15:22 [Roland]
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/open
16:16:00 [eric]
close action-36
16:16:00 [trackbot]
ACTION-36 Write up details around the use of text message, specifically addressing the "encoding" element in XML, the increased size as a consequence of base64 encoding. closed
16:16:27 [peaston]
peaston has joined #soap-jms
16:16:41 [eric]
close action-35
16:16:41 [trackbot]
ACTION-35 Update proposal re context variant and reply to for queue and topic closed
16:18:28 [eric]
close action-37
16:18:28 [trackbot]
ACTION-37 Write up how to indicate use of text message in WSDL. closed
16:19:37 [Roland]
Topic: URI changes
16:19:39 [Roland]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2008Sep/0046.html
16:27:24 [eric]
derek: Should we need to be able let someone specify a temporary topic?
16:27:34 [eric]
amy: Can't imagine anyone using a temporary topic.
16:29:27 [eric]
eric: don't think the scenario derek is raising actually applies.
16:29:53 [eric]
... only applies when the server specifically wants to set the reply destination - which is a rare case.
16:30:46 [eric]
peter: This is flexible - so long as we do not require reply to in the URI.
16:36:16 [eric]
action: roland to email/phone Oracle/BEA to see if they want to continue to be listed on the URI specification by 2008-10-08
16:36:16 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-39 - Email/phone Oracle/BEA to see if they want to continue to be listed on the URI specification by 2008-10-08 [on Roland Merrick - due 2008-10-14].
16:36:44 [eric]
Eric's change to URI scheme agreed to.
16:38:17 [Roland]
Topic: WSDL normative status
16:39:03 [Roland]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2008Sep/0043.html
16:41:29 [eric]
roland: soap protocol support required, WSDL 1.1 & WSDL 2.0 both optional, but if you implement them, you must implement them as stated.
16:42:11 [eric]
action: roland to write up specific proposal for conformance to address the normative concerns.
16:42:11 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-40 - Write up specific proposal for conformance to address the normative concerns. [on Roland Merrick - due 2008-10-14].
16:44:02 [Roland]
Topic: indication of textmessage in WSDL
16:44:14 [Roland]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2008Oct/0007.html
16:48:11 [eric]
eric: My concern about specifying anything is that then we have to specify conformance around what it means if you receive something other than what was expected.
16:48:53 [eric]
peaston: yes, this is about legacy scenarios.
16:50:32 [eric]
eric: we have a use case at TIBCO for sending TextMessage - but it is client side configuration, and doesn't appear in WSDL.
16:50:58 [eric]
peaston: not uncomfortable with not putting this in the spec.
16:51:51 [eric]
Phil: since we expect the runtime vendor to indicate whether to use text or bytes. If we allow for the message type to be specified - if you support WSDL 1.1 - then you have to support that message type parameter in the WSDL, and that might not make sense based on what the vendor has already defined.
16:52:09 [eric]
Roland: have we just talked ourselves out of doing this?
16:52:25 [eric]
Phil: Since we're not fully specifying, we probably shouldn't mention anything - up to the runtime vendor.
16:53:11 [eric]
Roland: anyone disagree with what Phil just said?
16:53:21 [eric]
... anyone think that we should keep this?
16:53:39 [eric]
... anyone object to dropping this item?
16:54:34 [eric]
peaston: dropping it is fine. I put it forth because of the use cases presented to support legacy interaction. If vendors are going to have their own switches, that's probably fine.
16:55:04 [eric]
... also through out the idea for ad-hoc items in the WSDL.
16:55:14 [eric]
Roland: Still on the agenda - we can do that next week.
16:56:02 [eric]
Phil: Can you clarify something - legacy vendor - they only accept text messages - to be truly interoperable, I need to know somehow how to send TextMessages.
16:56:18 [Phil]
actually that was Derek :)
16:57:01 [eric]
peaston: I might be able to describe myself in WSDL, and have a newer client work with my endpoint. A legacy server that only accepts TextMessage....
16:57:23 [eric]
Derek: We're not precluding a vendor specifying something to accommodate that.
16:57:34 [eric]
peaston: I just threw this out there to see if there is some interest.
16:58:06 [eric]
Oops - and that Derek before peaston - that was Phil.
16:58:16 [eric]
(SORRY!)
16:59:46 [eric]
Roland: Can we close of the issue of specifying text vs. bytes in WSDL? We're not going to specify it.
16:59:53 [eric]
(no disagreement on the call)
17:00:01 [Zakim]
-alewis
17:00:06 [Zakim]
-Derek
17:00:08 [Zakim]
-Phil
17:00:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-minutes.html Yves
17:00:12 [Zakim]
-eric
17:00:16 [Zakim]
-Roland
17:00:18 [Zakim]
-Yves
17:00:46 [Zakim]
-Peter_Easton
17:00:47 [Zakim]
WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM has ended
17:00:48 [Zakim]
Attendees were Phil, Roland, +1.708.246.aaaa, Derek, Peter_Easton, +1.650.846.aabb, eric, Yves, +1.919.742.aacc, alewis
17:00:57 [Roland]
06rrsagent, draft minutes01
17:01:24 [Roland]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:01:24 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-minutes.html Roland
17:01:55 [Roland]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:01:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-minutes.html Roland
17:03:32 [Roland]
rrsagent, please part
17:03:32 [RRSAgent]
I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-actions.rdf :
17:03:32 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Roland - put the just agreed-upon changes related to TextMessage into the spec (Phil's write up & Eric's writeup) [1]
17:03:32 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-irc#T16-14-52
17:03:32 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: roland to email/phone Oracle/BEA to see if they want to continue to be listed on the URI specification by 2008-10-08 [2]
17:03:32 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-irc#T16-36-16
17:03:32 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: roland to write up specific proposal for conformance to address the normative concerns. [3]
17:03:32 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-soap-jms-irc#T16-42-11