See also: IRC log
<Bob> zakim aabb is fmaciel
<Bob> scribe: Li Li
<gpilz> only in jury duty you get to meet a better class of people
<dug> lesson learned: be late :-)
approval of agenda
approval of minutes
minutes approved w/o objection
discussion of f2f meeting
bob: discuss if to attend w3c tag
meeting in ca in november
... we need to decide by 10th march if to attend
... review action items
<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax
review action #14 - done
bob: review FPWD
Asir: link to issue list missing in FPWD
bob: is it ok insert links to issue list
dug: no benefit to do so
asir: issues should be inserted
<asir> please see item 3 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0083.html
check item #3 in the above link
<Bob> proposal: In the status section of each spec, there should be a statement
<Bob> that explains the intent of this working draft. Perhaps something along
<Bob> the lines of: This working draft is meant only as a direct translation of
<Bob> the submitted spec into W3C format. There are many issues in the working
<Bob> group that will cause changes to this draft. Please see working group
<Bob> issue list.
kathy: is fpwd for w3c?
bob: any objection to the proposal?
ashok: problem with wording
JeffM: object to proposal
roll calling on proposal: y/n
software ag: abstain
bob: any other objection to fpwd?
<Ashok_Malhotra> Oracle also voted 'No'
bob: any objection to publish 5 fpwd?
no objection, will request to publish them dated today
bob: topic new issues
<Bob> Issue 6587
<Bob> ACTION: Dug as owner of 6588 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-17 - As owner of 6588 [on Doug Davis - due 2009-03-03].
<Bob> ACTION: Dug as owner of 6594 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-18 - As owner of 6594 [on Doug Davis - due 2009-03-03].
<dug> I'm sure the mute button learns all sorts of new phrases :-)
geoff: how to set filter for future?
<dug> isn't this part of the issue discussion?
gil: it's up to event source to decide
<Bob> ACTION: Gilbert as owner of 6595 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-19 - As owner of 6595 [on Gilbert Pilz - due 2009-03-03].
<Bob> ACTION: Geoff as owner of 6603 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - As owner of 6603 [on Geoff Bullen - due 2009-03-03].
<Bob> acton: Dug as owner of 6604
<Bob> ACTION: Dug as owner of 6604 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - As owner of 6604 [on Doug Davis - due 2009-03-03].
<Bob> ACTION: katy crate proposal for 6587 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Crate proposal for 6587 [on Katy Warr - due 2009-03-03].
katy: to improve proposal
geoff: introduce the proposal
<Bob> Geof's proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0128.html
geoff: align with http, backward comp, ws-i compliant
options for compliant to bp: relax, use policy, or go to bp wg
bob: any questions about the
... objection to accept proposal?
dug: why voting this one instead of mine?
asir: not sure the proposal is adequately explained
<marklittle> +1 to Katy
katy: thought voting for both
gil: object to microsoft proposal
<asir> where is the consensus?
bob: we have two proposals: geoff's and dug's. is dug's up to date?
<Bob> that is the one in the bugzilla
geoff: voting on it is too soon, need more time to discuss
<jeffm> maybe we all think we understand the differences
bob: more questions about both proposals?
wu: we need more time until next week
<TRutt1> keyboard clacking, please mute
bob: we need to clear this.
gil: two camps: back-comp vs. bp compliant, we should vote now
<Katy> +1 to voting and moving on
<asir> -1 to vote without discussion
bob: more discussion won't help
... will anyone change mind with more discussion?
<gpilz> FWIW I've read Geoff's proposal - I understand it and I object to it
<gpilz> I don't think any further discussion of it would change my opinion
bob: no one will change decision, will call vote on A and B proposals
<marklittle> let's just say ibm or msft?
<dug> a=Jan43=IBM b=feb128=MSFT
will vote on ibm vs. microsoft
software ag: abstain
bob: any formal objection
<Geoff> Microsoft objects to proposal a from IBM
<marklittle> +1 to Oracle. Has been pushed around for 3 weeks.
jeffm: enough time for people to make up their mind
<dug> actually more - since the f2f
bob: disentangling windows...
geoff: ok with the proposal, come up with suggestions
should we include wsa:To in the infoset?
wu: it is for infoset, not redefine wsa
<dug> +1 to Geoff
<dug> its very confusing - it looks like we're either restating what's already in WSA or worse possibly changing it
geoff: is wse wsa:to different from other usage of wsa:To?
wu: it can support different usage
geoff: more discussion offline
dug: like it because it's simple
and gives xml authority
... geoff suggests more text in standard?
geoff: infoset is also normative
wu: we provide infoset and xml binding, implementations must conform to xml
<asir> agree - both normative does not answer the question
gil: both being normative can create problem
wu: no requirement to produce xml
from infoset, rather the mapping is defined by the
... infoset and xml should be consistent, in case conflict, xml wins
dug: normative != authoritive
<asir> what environment?
authoritative can overwrite the other
wu: they are free of inconsistency and xml is authoritative
geoff: cardinality is a potential
... need to specify xml is authoritative
... infoset may cause inconsistency between different mappings
wu: infoset rules in that case
gpilz: infoset is interesting but is theoretic and makes standard larger
wu: infoset helps on compression, works with other standards
dug: ok with proposal, but object to adding more text to explain issues such as consistence
bob: is this proposal bad?
<dug> w/o the full description in the infoset section I think we'd reduce the chance of inconsistency
gil: not bad proposal but a bad idea
??: need more text to explain
dug: add one sentence is sufficient
<dug> could we perhaps have Wu redo the proposal with Geoff's edits and see what it looks like?
bob: general poll on if we should use infoset
<asir> +1 to dug
<dug> if he wants - I don't think there are a lot of changes but they might be important to help people decide.
wu: infoset extends applicability of wse in a non intrusive way, urge group to leverage infoset
jeffM: where are infoset used?
jeffm: practical use?
wu: compression uses infoset
bob: encourage wu to make next version or not?
ibm: yes if minimal work
software ag: ?
bob: do next version of infoset by voting
<Bob> ACTION: Wu to refine proposal for 6424 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Refine proposal for 6424 [on wu chou - due 2009-03-03].
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/??/Asir/ Succeeded: s/??/Asir/ Succeeded: s/something/link to issue list/ Succeeded: s/??/JeffM/ Succeeded: s/85/87/ FAILED: s/Micstosoft/Microsoft/ Succeeded: s/Micsrosoft/Microsoft/ Succeeded: s/authoritive/authoritative/ Succeeded: s/??/jeffM/ No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: li Found Scribe: Li Li WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: Ashok_Malhotra Asir Bob_Freund Don_Wright Mark_Little P32 SVij Sumeet TRutt1 Tom_Rutt Wu_Chou aaaa aabb acton ashok avaya bob dug fmaciel geoff gil gpilz hitachi ibm jeffM joined kathy katy marklittle microsoft ms oracle prasad proposal redhat trackbot ws-ra wu You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0122.html Got date from IRC log name: 24 Feb 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html People with action items: dug geoff gilbert katy wu WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]