IRC log of ws-ra on 2009-01-27

Timestamps are in UTC.

20:30:29 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
20:30:29 [RRSAgent]
logging to
20:30:31 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
20:30:31 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-ra
20:30:33 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
20:30:33 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM already started
20:30:34 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
20:30:34 [trackbot]
Date: 27 January 2009
20:30:45 [Zakim]
20:31:47 [Zakim]
20:31:48 [Zakim]
20:32:39 [Zakim]
20:32:41 [Zakim]
+ +1.703.266.aaaa
20:33:31 [Zakim]
+ +0208234aabb
20:34:07 [Sumeet]
Sumeet has joined #ws-ra
20:35:05 [Katy]
Katy has joined #ws-ra
20:35:09 [Yves]
Scribe: Gilbert
20:35:12 [gpilz]
scribenick: gpilz
20:35:28 [gpilz]
topic: roll call
20:36:24 [prasad]
prasad has joined #ws-ra
20:36:39 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
20:36:48 [prasad]
zakim, who is here?
20:36:48 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Doug_Davis, [Microsoft], [Oracle], Yves, Li_Li, Wu_Chou, Prasad_Yendluri, Vikas, Katy_Warr
20:36:51 [Zakim]
[Oracle] has gpilz
20:36:51 [Zakim]
[Microsoft] has Geoff
20:36:52 [Zakim]
Vikas has Vikas, Sumeet
20:36:53 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Vikas, prasad, Katy, Sumeet, Zakim, RRSAgent, gpilz, Geoff, dug, trackbot, Yves
20:37:08 [Wu]
Wu has joined #ws-ra
20:38:41 [gpilz]
roll will be tracked separately from the minutes
20:38:55 [Yves]
20:38:56 [gpilz]
topic: agenda
20:39:03 [dug]
Geoff - did you send in a proposal for 6404?
20:39:16 [Yves]
Geof want to talk about 6404 if time permit
20:39:17 [Geoff]
no, sorry, did not get a chance
20:39:22 [gpilz]
Katy: I raised 6472 as a new issue
20:39:27 [Geoff]
but we can talk a bit if you like and then I will send update
20:39:30 [dug]
ok good - thought my email trashed it by mistake :-)
20:39:44 [gpilz]
topic: minutes
20:40:03 [gpilz]
yves: did people get a chance to look at the minutes from the F2F
20:40:12 [gpilz]
resolved: minutes from F2F approved
20:40:33 [gpilz]
resolved: minutes from 1/20/2009 approved
20:40:35 [Yves]
20:40:37 [gpilz]
topic: tracker
20:40:49 [dug]
trackbot, status
20:40:49 [trackbot]
Sorry, dug, I don't understand 'trackbot, status'. Please refer to for help
20:41:08 [Yves]
20:41:43 [gpilz]
yves: we aren't using Tacker for issues
20:41:59 [Yves] to access your own actions
20:42:00 [gpilz]
...: so the issue-related commands are irrelevant
20:42:11 [gpilz]
geoff: will that allow you to get a list of all action item?
20:42:15 [gpilz]
yves: two modes
20:42:21 [gpilz]
...: in general, all AIS
20:42:40 [gpilz]
...: but using "my" will just give you yours (across all W3C WGs)
20:42:51 [gpilz]
topic: editors report
20:42:58 [gpilz]
yves: traffic on mailing list
20:43:06 [gpilz]
doug: we're half-way done
20:43:17 [gpilz]
...: 2.5 specs complete and the others in a day or so
20:43:29 [gpilz]
...: on track to get conversion done by end of the week
20:43:38 [dug]
20:43:52 [gpilz]
geoff: will those be available?
20:44:04 [gpilz]
doug: this is where we will put our files
20:44:13 [gpilz]
...: we'll send out a note at the end of the week
20:44:26 [gpilz]
yves: tomorrow I will add links to the editors drafts
20:44:27 [Yves]
ACTION: Yves to add link to the edcopies (once they are ready for review)
20:44:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-1 - Add link to the edcopies (once they are ready for review) [on Yves Lafon - due 2009-02-03].
20:45:48 [gpilz]
topic: new issues
20:45:48 [Yves]
20:46:31 [gpilz]
katy: (describes issue)
20:47:44 [gpilz]
...: how would we recommend that clients get the policies that they should use for the GetMetadata request
20:47:50 [gpilz]
...: bootstrapping problem
20:48:05 [gpilz]
...: how should policy be exchanged?
20:48:17 [gpilz]
geoff: any ideas on how to do this?
20:48:36 [gpilz]
katy: it may not be possible to exchange policy; may need some out-of-band agreement
20:48:51 [gpilz]
...: as a group we need to agree on what we would recommend
20:49:01 [gpilz]
yves: accept this?
20:49:11 [gpilz]
resolved: 6463 accepted
20:49:39 [gpilz]
assign 6463 to Katy
20:49:39 [dug]
20:50:06 [gpilz]
katy: (describes issue)
20:51:00 [gpilz]
wu: can you provide more details
20:51:28 [gpilz]
...: do you want to propose similar changes on "unable to renew"?
20:52:12 [gpilz]
yves: we can accept this and close with no action if necessary
20:52:22 [gpilz]
wu: we can accept this issue but we'd like to see more details
20:52:38 [gpilz]
resolved: 6472 accepted and assigned to Katy
20:53:11 [Yves]
20:53:54 [dug]
20:54:21 [Geoff]
20:54:31 [gpilz]
wu: I don't have anything to add to this proposal
20:54:41 [gpilz]
...: we left this for people to study
20:54:48 [dug]
No objection to the proposal
20:54:55 [gpilz]
Li Li: proposal is to expand the current element
20:55:07 [gpilz]
Wu: (describes proposal)
20:55:37 [gpilz]
20:55:49 [dug]
interesting, so "+q" does work
20:55:56 [gpilz]
geoff: I have no real objection to this
20:56:07 [gpilz]
...: we need to think about the wording
20:56:17 [gpilz]
...: the "Delivery" section in the eventing spec
20:56:33 [gpilz]
...: one question; using "Push" is NotifyTo mandatory?
20:56:43 [gpilz]
wu: yeah
20:56:53 [gpilz]
geoff: the spec doesn't say that and neither does the schema
20:57:13 [gpilz]
li li: it's hard for the schema to enforce that
20:57:22 [gpilz]
geoff: we need to fix the normative language
20:57:44 [gpilz]
...: we also want to make sure that there is there are optional things you can add
20:57:57 [gpilz]
li li: that's the sense we got from the discussion
20:58:09 [gpilz]
...: I agree, the language should make it very clear
20:58:21 [gpilz]
...: not sure there is a way to make the schema enforce this
20:58:57 [gpilz]
gil: we do this all the time; normative language that enforces further constraints on the XML
20:59:17 [gpilz]
geoff: we need something that says "in delivery modes other than push you don't need NotifyTo"
20:59:40 [gpilz]
21:00:47 [Yves]
ACTION: Li Li to add some wording to clarify the use of NotifyTo (re: issue 6426)
21:00:47 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2 - Li to add some wording to clarify the use of NotifyTo (re: issue 6426) [on Li Li - due 2009-02-03].
21:01:12 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.970.aacc
21:02:44 [Yves]
21:03:29 [Yves]
21:03:31 [gpilz]
Li: (describes issue)
21:04:09 [dug]
no objection
21:04:16 [gpilz]
no objection
21:04:30 [dug]
woo hoo - one down! we're flying now! :-)
21:04:34 [Geoff]
no objection
21:04:42 [gpilz]
resolved: 6427 closed with proposed resolution plus ammendments
21:05:43 [Zakim]
21:06:02 [Yves]
21:06:26 [gpilz]
doug: (describes issue and proposal)
21:06:32 [Geoff]
21:06:46 [gpilz]
doug: nothing new since last week
21:07:16 [gpilz]
yves: crux of issue was xs:any vs. xs:any*
21:07:24 [gpilz]
doug: that was a separate issue
21:07:44 [Katy]
Katy has joined #ws-ra
21:07:45 [gpilz]
yves: depends if the group agrees
21:07:48 [Zakim]
21:08:24 [gpilz]
geoff: one issue we have is doesn't this effect what happens with 6392 and 6396?
21:08:40 [gpilz]
...: I know you're talking about schema, but the wording is effected as well
21:08:58 [gpilz]
...: how will the text change?
21:09:02 [dug]
21:09:09 [dug]
21:09:25 [gpilz]
doug: basically leave text as is, then look at them separately
21:09:38 [gpilz]
...: this proposal may close those issues with no action
21:09:47 [gpilz]
geoff: the wording will have to change somewhat
21:10:03 [gpilz]
doug: that is either another issue or, during review, we can raise a new issue
21:10:13 [gpilz]
...: don't think we need to resolve that in this issue at this time
21:10:16 [gpilz]
21:10:47 [gpilz]
geoff: we're not going to talk about the xs:any* issues?
21:11:18 [gpilz]
doug: to me that is a side issue
21:11:18 [gpilz]
...: i'd like to just get the wrapper in place
21:11:18 [gpilz]
...: then address the cardinality issues later
21:11:34 [gpilz]
geoff: i'm not sure i'm going to be willing to close on this today
21:11:51 [gpilz]
...: are you expecting others to raise those issues separately
21:12:12 [gpilz]
yves: i hear that people are not ready yet to agree on closing it
21:12:18 [gpilz]
geoff: i'd like one more week
21:12:30 [gpilz]
...: how is it going to affect RT and everything gels
21:12:52 [gpilz]
yves: be ready to discuss this next week
21:14:26 [Yves]
ACTION: dug to raise issue about cardinality of xs:any, relative to issue 6398
21:14:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-3 - Raise issue about cardinality of xs:any, relative to issue 6398 [on Doug Davis - due 2009-02-03].
21:14:53 [Yves]
21:15:14 [Zakim]
21:15:17 [Yves]
21:15:44 [gpilz]
doug: don't want to resolve this but am willing to discuss
21:16:01 [gpilz]
...: one way is to simply remove this operation
21:16:08 [Zakim]
21:16:11 [gpilz]
...: but that probably won't be popular
21:16:23 [gpilz]
...: would like to defer this until we resolve the WS-Eventing issues
21:16:37 [gpilz]
...: because whatever we do will probably be patterned after that solution
21:16:56 [gpilz]
geoff: I don't like the option of removing this operation
21:17:07 [Yves]
21:17:27 [gpilz]
all: we did this one already
21:17:51 [Yves]
21:18:22 [dug]
Gil: reviews his proposal
21:19:13 [dug]
21:20:27 [gpilz]
doug: two parts - remove wsa04:action is obvious
21:20:38 [gpilz]
doug: thinks we should use wsam:Action
21:20:42 [gpilz]
geoff: agrees
21:20:49 [FBM]
FBM has joined #ws-ra
21:20:54 [gpilz]
ACTION: gpilz to update proposal to include wsam:Action
21:20:54 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-4 - Update proposal to include wsam:Action [on Gilbert Pilz - due 2009-02-03].
21:22:05 [gpilz]
doug: would like to discuss proposals
21:22:10 [Yves]
21:22:12 [gpilz]
yves: lets start with gils
21:22:43 [dug]
gil: talks about his proposal for wseventing bp/policy/... issues
21:23:49 [dug]
... very raw proposal - looking for initial feedback
21:24:16 [dug]
... endpoint policy subject
21:24:22 [dug]
... wsdl port level
21:27:15 [dug]
... this wsdl defines what the event sink needs to support
21:28:57 [Wu]
21:29:03 [dug]
21:31:18 [dug]
21:36:41 [dug] what's that???
21:37:03 [dug]
21:37:22 [Wu]
would like to have a better understanding of backward competibility with exisiting ws-eventing implemetation
21:37:25 [Wu]
21:37:27 [gpilz]
doug: I don't believe this impacts what appears on the wire
21:37:42 [gpilz]
wu: i think this is something we need to really study
21:38:01 [gpilz]
...: one thing we need to think about is how to maintain the spirit of ws-evetning
21:38:02 [gpilz]
21:38:15 [gpilz]
...: need to make it friendly to existing implementations
21:38:21 [gpilz]
...: we need to be prudent
21:38:39 [gpilz]
...: everybody should check this out for issues
21:40:16 [dug]
21:41:32 [gpilz]
21:41:51 [dug]
21:41:58 [Wu]
Thanks for point out that
21:45:00 [Yves]
21:45:00 [gpilz]
topic: proposal on 6429
21:45:33 [Zakim]
21:45:51 [gpilz]
Li: (describes proposal)
21:46:39 [dug]
21:47:22 [gpilz]
21:48:11 [dug]
that's ok - I didn't mind if gil went first :-)
21:51:14 [dug]
21:52:52 [dug]
<wse:Notify actionURI="xs:anyURI"> </wse:Notify> would be the body
21:53:57 [dug]
<wsa:Action> http://.../wseventing/Notify </wsa:Action>
21:55:46 [gpilz]
why not the wsa:Action?
21:56:20 [gpilz]
putting metadata (which is what "action" is) in the body makes it harder to retrieve
21:56:24 [dug]
some people dispatch on the wsa:Action - so it would need to be static just like the Body in order to go to the same operation each time.
21:56:38 [gpilz]
fair enough
21:56:39 [Zakim]
21:56:41 [Zakim]
21:56:42 [Zakim]
21:56:42 [Zakim]
21:56:43 [Zakim]
21:56:44 [Zakim]
21:56:46 [Zakim]
21:56:48 [Zakim]
21:56:53 [Zakim]
21:56:55 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
21:56:56 [Zakim]
Attendees were Doug_Davis, Yves, Geoff, gpilz, Wu_Chou, Prasad_Yendluri, +1.703.266.aaaa, Li_Li, Vikas, Sumeet, +0208234aabb, Katy_Warr, +1.408.970.aacc, Fred_Maciel
21:57:12 [gpilz]
yves, how do I process these minutes?
21:57:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Yves
21:57:46 [Yves]
gil: see
21:58:02 [Yves]
nothing more to do ;)
21:58:20 [gpilz]
send email?
21:58:44 [Yves]
not needed, we will put a amended version in the ws/ra space and Bob will send an email
21:58:59 [gpilz]
21:59:12 [Yves]
thank you for scribing !
22:01:58 [Yves]
rrsagent, bye
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
I see 4 open action items saved in :
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Yves to add link to the edcopies (once they are ready for review) [1]
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Li Li to add some wording to clarify the use of NotifyTo (re: issue 6426) [2]
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: dug to raise issue about cardinality of xs:any, relative to issue 6398 [3]
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: gpilz to update proposal to include wsam:Action [4]
22:01:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in