SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Teleconference

17 Mar 2009


See also: IRC log






<trackbot> Date: 17 March 2009

<scribe> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Mar/0020.html

<scribe> scribe: mphillip


<Roland> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/open

<scribe> No progress on http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/32

Derek: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/64
... Talked about this a few calls ago, actions was to clean up Derek's recommendation
... to modify statement in 2.2.2; Specify new assertions for topic replyToName
... and add a new assertion and new test

<Roland> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Mar/0006.html

mphillip: Not sure about the wording "if relevant" - maybe say "if not ignored"

Roland: Perhaps incorporate the rules into the new assertion
... I will update the spec with this wording - strengthening the assertion

<scribe> ACTION: Roland to Incorporate Derek's text into spec. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-soap-jms-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-72 - Incorporate Derek's text into spec. [on Roland Merrick - due 2009-03-24].

close action-64

<trackbot> ACTION-64 Clarify spec about topic replyToName closed

close action-67

<trackbot> ACTION-67 Redraft words re replyTo and topicReplyTO closed

(Action 67 was a duplicate of 64)

Derek: No progress on http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/66

close action-66

<trackbot> ACTION-66 Bring up the additional MEP closed

(Action 68 is a follow up to 66)

Derek: No progress on http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/68

Eric: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/69 note sent to the list with a proposal


Eric: This is a response to Harald's comments from a month ago (the IRI draft expires in May)
... First comment from Harald was that this URI uses only a local context (e.g. jndi directories inside a firewall),
... Propose an update to URI spec to clarify how a shared context of appropriate scope must be established

(No objections to wording from attendees)

Eric: Harald's second comment questions the "variant" and whether it will clash with parameters. Because of the limited number of likely variants we do not expect this to be a problem

<Roland> "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds"

Eric: The third comment was on the inconsistency on "jndi" vs. "jndi-" prefixes for parameters
... (caused by the difference between well-known and extension parameters)
... Propose a number of options in the email. Reluctant to introduce consistency for the sake of it. If people would like time to digest this, then Eric will postpone the response

Roland: Could send a response based on the first two items

Eric: I will do that

Roland: The names are inconsistent anyway - in some cases we use camel casing, in other cases we use the dotted notation (com.sun.jndi.*)

Derek: When we first discussed we considered using the full term as a prefix "jndiContextParameter-" and then condensed because it was so long

Eric: There is some merit in having shorter URIs
... On Harald's last comment, I believe the specification it is better as-is

action Eric to Follow up IRI jndi issue after next week with Harald

<trackbot> Created ACTION-73 - Follow up IRI jndi issue after next week with Harald [on Eric Johnson - due 2009-03-24].

close action-69

<trackbot> ACTION-69 Come up with revised URI scheme pass for review next week closed

<Roland> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/pendingreview

Peter: No progress on http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/71

Roland: Pending Review http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/48

<Roland> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Mar/0005.html

Roland: Don't think we need to define destination in any more detail

Eric: I believe the term destination is sufficient, especially in JMS where Destination is a well established concept

<alewis> +1

mphillip: Agreed

resolution: action-48 No change is necessary to definition of destination

close action-48

<trackbot> ACTION-48 Look at Destination and terms in general in spec perhaps post LC closed

Phil: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/70 revised wording submitted to list
... Latest email http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Mar/0016.html

Eric: Phil's updates clarify the spec. Suggest a little precision, to identify the specifications which are mentioned with formal references
... ...and identify specific sections of the RFCs or specifications where possible

Roland: So we need a new normative reference to RFC2376

Eric: Right, and reference the specific portions of the SOAP 1.1 and SOAP 1.2 specifications (like we did for the MEPs)

Phil: The suggested wording did reference particular parts of the SOAP spec.s - will go back and identify the precise references

Eric: Technically the message is not just a byte stream any more - could be a text message
... May need to keep in the sentence which identifies that If the message is formatted as "text/xml" or "application/soap+xml" then the first thing MUST be a conforming XML document

Roland: Do we have this assertion elsewhere? If so we should just reference it

Eric: I will revise Phil's proposal

Roland: No need for a new action - Eric to propose rewording Phil's action 70

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Roland to Incorporate Derek's text into spec. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-soap-jms-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/03/17 16:54:02 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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)

Found Scribe: mphillip
Inferring ScribeNick: mphillip

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: Derek Peter Peter_Easton Phil Roland Yves aaaa aacc alewis eric joined mphillip peaston soap-jms trackbot
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Regrets: Bhakti
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Mar/0020.html
Found Date: 17 Mar 2009
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-soap-jms-minutes.html
People with action items: roland

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]