19:21:07 RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra 19:21:07 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-ws-ra-irc 19:21:09 RRSAgent, make logs public 19:21:09 Zakim has joined #ws-ra 19:21:11 Zakim, this will be WSRA 19:21:11 ok, trackbot, I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM already started 19:21:12 Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference 19:21:12 Date: 07 April 2009 19:21:52 agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Apr/0021.html 19:23:55 regrets+ Mark Little 19:24:42 +Tom_Rutt 19:27:46 Vikas has joined #ws-ra 19:28:17 dug has joined #ws-ra 19:28:53 +Doug_Davis 19:29:11
  • li has joined #ws-ra 19:29:47 Wu has joined #ws-ra 19:29:59 +Yves 19:30:01 +Vikas 19:30:35 +Wu_Chou 19:30:48 +Gilbert 19:31:10 zakim, Wu has li 19:31:10 +li; got it 19:31:40 asir has joined #ws-ra 19:31:50 Ashok has joined #ws-ra 19:32:12 +[Microsoft] 19:32:19 +Ashok_Malhotra 19:32:40 zakim, [Micro is Ram 19:32:40 +Ram; got it 19:32:45 gpilz has joined #ws-ra 19:33:37 zakim, Ram has Asir 19:33:37 +Asir; got it 19:35:32 asir has joined #ws-ra 19:35:47 Ram has joined #ws-ra 19:36:03 scribenick Ram 19:36:24 scribenick: Ram 19:37:01 No objections to agenda. Agenda approved. 19:37:30 No objections to approving minutes from March 31, 2009. Minutes approved. 19:37:38 funny how [4] in the agenda is blank 19:37:46 RESOLUTION: No objections to approving minutes from March 31, 2009. Minutes approved. 19:38:03 RESOLUTION: No objections to agenda. Agenda approved. 19:38:57 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Apr/0020.html 19:40:01 q+ 19:40:36 ack gp 19:41:02 Gil has not reviewed the April snapshots. Everyone is encouraged to read and discuss the issues in question. 19:41:05 q+ 19:41:06 gil's your straightman :-) 19:41:49 -Yves 19:41:57 ack asir 19:41:57 Bob: Please review the latest revision of the specifications. 19:42:01 +Yves 19:42:20 Asir: Is the diff between the submitted version and the latest version? 19:43:01 Bob explains how the diff works. 19:43:08 ack yves 19:43:16 Bob's page is at http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/EdDiffFPWD.html 19:44:21 Yves: Can we record in each issue all the notification URIs (and diffs) associated with each issue? 19:44:45 Bob; Do the editors have an opinion? 19:44:54 Doug: It sounds like a lot of work. 19:45:28 Yves: There are some advantages such as backtracking ,etc. 19:46:08 Doug: Editors have been committing at most one issue per commit. Hence, the CVS comment field notifications should suffice. 19:46:39 automagic is good :-) 19:46:48 Sounds like it can be automated! 19:47:12 Asir: Will we continue to have HTML diff versions? 19:47:43 Bob says the diff service tools allow for this. 19:49:28 Bob: Review the diffs and the change logs so we can change the state of incorporated issues from Remind to Closed. 19:49:41 Bob: Do this by next week! 19:49:47 looks like a cool tool 19:49:51 agree 19:49:58 Bob: Discovery of diff service is a God send! 19:50:18 can we get a link to the wiki on the wsra home page? 19:50:25 http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/wiki/Main_Page 19:50:29 Bob:We have a Wiki for the WG set up. The link is in the agenda. 19:50:58 q+ 19:51:23 ack dug 19:51:49 Doug: Question for Yves. Does Wiki page send notifications? 19:53:46 Bob: Wiki has a way to consolidate arguments on technical issues in one place. 19:54:15 Correction: Wiki does not have a way, but it allows for such consolidation. 19:54:39 Issues discussion 19:54:43 Issue 6730 19:54:46 Topic: 6730 19:55:06 latest updated proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Apr/0017.html 19:55:56 Proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Apr/0024.html 19:56:05 q+ 19:56:30 ack ram 19:56:41
  • http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6730 19:57:11 AI: Ram to prepare the consolidated proposal. 19:57:29 action: Ram to consolidate 6730 proposals for consideration next time 19:57:29 Created ACTION-54 - Consolidate 6730 proposals for consideration next time [on Ram Jeyaraman - due 2009-04-14]. 19:57:30 Action: Ram to prep a consolidated proposal for issue 6730 19:57:30 Created ACTION-55 - Prep a consolidated proposal for issue 6730 [on Ram Jeyaraman - due 2009-04-14]. 19:58:14 Topic: 6715 19:58:28 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6715 19:59:50 RRSAgent, where am I? 19:59:50 See http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-ws-ra-irc#T19-59-50 20:00:07 RESOLUTION: Issue 6715 resolved with proposal in Bugzilla. 20:00:18 Topic: 6725 20:00:38 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6725 20:00:50 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6725#c1 20:01:25 q+ Ram 20:01:28 q+ 20:01:45 ack ram 20:02:53 Suggested change: 20:04:17 This is in Section 3.3 20:04:19 In the definition of “Delivery Mode”, change “The mechanism by which event messages are delivered from the source to the sink” to “The mechanism by which event messages (or notifications) are delivered from the source to the sink.”. 20:04:30 CGI471 has joined #ws-ra 20:04:41 Re-paste 20:04:42 In the definition of “Delivery Mode”, change “The mechanism by which event messages are delivered from the source to the sink” to “The mechanism by which event messages (or notifications) are delivered from the source to the sink.”. 20:06:51 CGI471 has joined #ws-ra 20:08:01 Ram has joined #ws-ra 20:08:59 q+ 20:09:27 ack dug 20:10:20 +1 to use of "Notification" consistently 20:12:41 Proposal: 20:12:42 Change all uses of "event messages" with "notifications". The first use will 20:12:44 actually just be deleted since "notifications" is already in that sentence. 20:12:45 Suggested change: 20:12:47 • Section 3.3 [1]: In the definition of “Delivery Mode”, change “The 20:12:48 mechanism by which event messages are delivered from the source to the sink” to 20:12:51 “The mechanism by which event notifications are delivered from 20:12:53 the source to the sink.”. 20:12:54 • Section 3.3 [1]: In the definition of “Subscription Manager”: Change “A 20:12:56 Web service that accepts requests to manage get the status of, renew, and/or 20:12:57 delete subscriptions on behalf of an event source.” To “A Web service that 20:12:59 accepts requests to create, get the status of, renew, 20:13:44 and/or delete 20:13:46 subscriptions on behalf of an event source.”. 20:13:47 [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-eventing-20090317/#terms 20:15:05 RESOLUTION: Issue 6725 has been resolved as proposed with a merger of Doug's proposal and Ram's. Further, use the term 'notification' consistently. 20:15:37 action: Dug to respod to reviewer on 6725 20:15:37 Created ACTION-56 - Respod to reviewer on 6725 [on Doug Davis - due 2009-04-14]. 20:16:24 Topic: 6727 20:16:38 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6727 20:16:51 q+ Ram 20:16:54 q+ 20:16:57 goog pick, 20:17:07 good even 20:17:13 ack ram 20:17:13 ops , good pick 20:17:37 q+ 20:17:45 zakim, who is making noise 20:17:45 I don't understand 'who is making noise', Bob 20:17:51 zakim, who is making noise? 20:18:03 Bob, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Doug_Davis (47%), Gilbert (9%), Ram (33%), Ashok_Malhotra (13%) 20:18:54 ack gp 20:20:40
  • q+ 20:21:08 ack li 20:21:44 +JeffM 20:21:53 Replace UnSubscribeResponse with UnsubscribeResponse 20:23:10 Topic: 6726 20:23:26 q+ 20:24:02 ack asir 20:24:09 q+ 20:24:56 ack ashok 20:25:11 Asir: use a similar template to 6725 to resolve 6726 20:25:43 s/6725/6727/ 20:26:22 RESOLUTION: Issue 6726 is resolved. 20:27:39 q+ 20:27:52 Topic: 6728 20:28:04 ack asir 20:28:22 RESOLUTION: Issue 6728 is resolved. 20:29:24 q+ 20:29:32 q+ 20:29:37 Bob: We are not close to resolving the issue on Delivery Mode. 20:29:45 ack gp 20:30:12 ack tru 20:30:33 q+ 20:30:46 Tom: It is clear to me that one faction thinks that the spec output is wire compatible with the older versions but the other faction thinks not. 20:31:02 q+ 20:31:27 Tom: Need to make the specifications work with other WS-* specifications. 20:31:46 ack asir 20:32:21 ack wu 20:33:30 Wu: We need to provide compatibility as much as possible. 20:34:15 q+ 20:34:16 Bob; Is there a commonality between the proposals? 20:34:24 ack wu 20:34:28 q+ 20:34:50 Wu: Removal of Delivery Mode will cause significant change to existing implementations. 20:35:06 q+ 20:35:25 Wu: Is there a problem with the existing Delivery Mode semantics? 20:36:23 queue please 20:36:33 ack asir 20:36:45 Asir: The justification to drop Delivery Mode abstration is redundancy. 20:37:04 Asir: Delivery Mode is not redundant. 20:37:19 Asir: I have not seen a credible alternative yet. 20:37:48 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Apr/0016.html 20:37:49 ack dug 20:37:57 Asir: If there is a credible alternative that will help us build consensus. 20:38:30 q+ 20:38:35 Doug: I explained how Delivery Mode does not work. 20:38:36 q+ 20:39:20 Doug: It is a functional problem we are trying to fix. I sent this via email. 20:39:32 ack gp 20:39:47 q+ 20:39:56 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Apr/0033.html 20:40:13 Gil: I beleive Doug has provide credible examples. 20:40:50 ack track wu 20:40:57 ack wu 20:40:58 Wu: I have posted a response to Doug's email. 20:41:18 Wu's email does not address the technical issues I raised 20:41:24 Wu: Yes, you can use SOAP headers to signify mode of use. 20:41:41 Wu: The WS-Eventing specification already allows use of SOAP headers. 20:41:52 Wu: I don't think anything is broken. 20:41:55 Wu's proposal: all Modes need to define mU header and a Mode attribute URI 20:42:16 Wu: If we remove the Delivery Mode attribute, it will break current implementations. I don't any benefit to doing so. 20:42:22 every example of mode use seen so far by me can be accomodated with ws-* composition. I suggest we remove it now and only introduce such a feature later when ws-eventing has its own use case which cannot be satisfied with ws-* composition 20:42:26 ack tr 20:42:38 q+ 20:42:47 q+ 20:42:50 q+ 20:43:19 q- 20:43:58 OUr response to Tom is here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Apr/0023.html 20:44:58 Bob: Summarizes the two sides of the argument. 20:45:49 But, neither the delivery mode abstraction nor the mode attribute indicates what Web Services technologies (such as reliable messaging, security features, SOAP version, transport binding and make connection) should be used (or composed) to deliver events. 20:45:49 Please find a description of what does a delivery mode indicate and why it is essential at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Mar/0132.html 20:46:23 q+ 20:46:42 Bob: There are two different proposals. 20:47:02 Bob: Is one proposal to close this issue with no action. 20:47:19 Asir, Wu: Correct. 20:47:45 WHAT FEATURE? 20:47:53 Read mail archive 20:48:09 yadda yadda yadda 20:48:11 read it 20:48:11 Bob: It removes a valuable feature. 20:48:16 it's all still there 20:48:32 q? 20:49:07 Doug: Show us the solid use case to show why Delivery Mode is needed. 20:49:41 q+ 20:49:43 We provided use cases from the DMTF WS-Man Standard DSP 226 20:49:45 ack dug 20:50:13 s/read mail archive/http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Mar/0132.html/ 20:50:19 ever one of those use cases can be supported via standard SOAP and WS-Addressing mechanisms 20:50:31 Doug: We provided a proposal to solve the composition problem where there are non-conflicting modes. 20:50:36 none of them require a unique "Mode" attribute 20:51:10 Doug: This is causing people problems. 20:51:18 WS-* is based on the orthogonal composition of . . . what's the point? 20:51:26 nobody is listening 20:51:41 q+ 20:51:46 Wu: Can we use both SOAP headers and Delivery Mode, correct? 20:52:08 Doug: Existing mode extensibility mechanism will probably not work as described in WS-Eventing. 20:52:53 Wu: WS-Eventing allows use of SOAP headers. 20:52:58 q+ 20:53:03 ack wu 20:53:06 Wu: in addition to Delivery Mode attribute. 20:53:36 yes - other specs (like RM) use soap headers to extend itself 20:53:39 Wu: Question to Yves: Is is OK to use SOAP header in this way to extend the delivery mode semantics. 20:54:42 q+ 20:54:50 q+ 20:54:55 Bob: The question really is whether we really want to foster the behavior of overloading the URI? Or do we need another mechanism? Or provide both? 20:55:07 ws man mode definitions can be handled using ws-makeconnection, ws-reliable-messaging and the new batching feature of our current draft for ws-eventing. My concern is that the next gen of ws-man should not have features which are redundant with those already accomplished by an orthogonal set of ws-* specs. Allowing such app spec specific redundancy in its spec seems to be of little benefit. 20:55:13 ack tru 20:55:55 Tom: My concern is that I want WS-Man NOT to have features that are redundant. It will make it more difficult. 20:55:56 Tom: My concern is that I want WS-Man NOT to have features that are redundant. It will make it more difficult. 20:56:52 ack gp 20:56:59 Bob: We can leave the existing mechanism and deprecate it. 20:57:57 Gil: I have concerns on interoperability. Wu says that mode attribute is an extensibility point and is advancing it as a good thing. In my mind it is the opposite. 20:58:09 Gil: Giving so many options causes interoperability problems. 20:58:40 Gil: Duplicating extensibility points is not a good thing. 20:58:49 interop against extensibility is an unsolvable issue anyway 20:58:53 ack wu 20:59:30 Wu: this is a SOAP spec - I don't get it 20:59:41 Wu: On Tom's point. The standard semantics should be relatively independent. Now we are trying to move the eventing semantics in to SOAP headers. This will be a problem going forward years from now. 20:59:44 WS-Eventing beyond SOAP is outside our charter 20:59:51 *way* outside our charter 21:00:01 we talk about mU headers in other parts of the spec -should we remove those? 21:00:19 ack asir 21:00:20 Yves: the problem is that, to tell whether or not a message has been extended I need to check 8 different places 21:00:41 q+ 21:00:59 SOAP extension is allowed and you will see strange things. 21:01:15 q- 21:01:21 Asir: We want to have a good reason to change the Delivery Mode mechanism. 21:01:27 Been provided - but ignored 21:01:39 Doug: The examples have been provided earlier. 21:02:02 asir: it doesn't seem likely that there would be any reason good enough to meet your criteria of "sufficient" 21:02:16 Please! 21:02:38 Bob: At some point, we need to reach consensus. 21:02:54 Bob: otherwise, we want to pull the plug on consensus. 21:03:10 -Tom_Rutt 21:03:15 -Ashok_Malhotra 21:03:45 -Ram 21:03:46 -Wu_Chou 21:03:46 -Vikas 21:03:47 -Bob_Freund 21:03:49 -JeffM 21:03:50 -Yves 21:03:52 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-ws-ra-minutes.html Yves 21:03:53 -Doug_Davis 21:03:57 -Gilbert 21:03:59 WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended 21:04:00 Attendees were Bob_Freund, Tom_Rutt, Doug_Davis, Yves, Vikas, Gilbert, li, [Microsoft], Ashok_Malhotra, Asir, JeffM 21:04:11 TRutt has left #ws-ra 21:04:19 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-ws-ra-minutes.html Yves 21:04:35 Zakim has left #ws-ra 21:04:44 I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-ws-ra-actions.rdf : 21:04:44 ACTION: Ram to consolidate 6730 proposals for consideration next time [1] 21:04:44 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-ws-ra-irc#T19-57-29 21:04:44 ACTION: Ram to prep a consolidated proposal for issue 6730 [2] 21:04:44 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-ws-ra-irc#T19-57-30 21:04:44 ACTION: Dug to respod to reviewer on 6725 [3] 21:04:44 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-ws-ra-irc#T20-15-37 21:04:47 Bob asks the WG members to review the minutes carefully and make sure everything is properly scribed. 21:04:47 Bob asks the WG members to review the minutes carefully and make sure everything is properly scribed.