IRC log of ws-ra on 2009-06-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:10:22 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
19:10:22 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/06/23-ws-ra-irc
19:10:24 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:10:24 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-ra
19:10:26 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
19:10:26 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 20 minutes
19:10:27 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
19:10:27 [trackbot]
Date: 23 June 2009
19:21:33 [Geoff]
Geoff has joined #ws-ra
19:25:45 [Bob]
Bob has joined #ws-ra
19:27:42 [Bob]
test
19:28:00 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has now started
19:28:06 [Zakim]
+??P3
19:28:06 [Bob]
trackbot, start telecon
19:28:08 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:28:10 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
19:28:10 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM already started
19:28:11 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
19:28:11 [trackbot]
Date: 23 June 2009
19:28:31 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
19:28:38 [Zakim]
+Bob_Freund
19:28:59 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
19:29:08 [Zakim]
+ +91.98.49.99.aaaa
19:29:30 [Zakim]
-??P3
19:29:35 [dug]
dug has joined #ws-ra
19:29:38 [Ram]
Ram has joined #ws-ra
19:30:01 [Bob]
agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jun/
19:30:15 [Zakim]
+Doug_Davis
19:30:19 [Zakim]
+??P8
19:30:31 [Zakim]
+Gilbert
19:30:53 [Bob]
zakim, ??P8 is Paul
19:30:53 [Zakim]
+Paul; got it
19:31:20 [Asir2]
Asir2 has joined #ws-ra
19:31:20 [Yves]
Yves has changed the topic to: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jun/
19:31:26 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:31:47 [gpilz]
gpilz has joined #ws-ra
19:32:01 [Bob]
regrets+ Ashok
19:32:09 [Zakim]
+Vikas
19:32:12 [Wu]
Wu has joined #ws-ra
19:32:32 [Bob]
zakim, [Micro is Asir
19:32:32 [Zakim]
+Asir; got it
19:32:43 [Bob]
zakim, Asir has Ram
19:32:43 [Zakim]
+Ram; got it
19:32:52 [Bob]
zakim, Asir has Geoff
19:32:52 [Zakim]
+Geoff; got it
19:32:54 [Zakim]
+Wu_Chou
19:33:04 [Zakim]
+Yves
19:33:15 [Bob]
Zakim, Wu has Li
19:33:15 [Zakim]
+Li; got it
19:34:23 [Bob]
agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jun/0050.html
19:34:38 [fmaciel]
fmaciel has joined #ws-ra
19:35:19 [Bob]
scribe: Paul Nolan
19:35:28 [Bob]
scribenick: Paul
19:36:16 [li]
li has joined #ws-ra
19:37:06 [Paul]
Geoff: should we eximine vacation plans?
19:37:31 [Paul]
Agenda agreed
19:38:10 [Paul]
No objections to approving all 3 F2F minutes
19:38:26 [Paul]
Minutes approved
19:39:25 [Paul]
No objections to closing incoporated issues in snapshot
19:39:42 [Paul]
TOPIC: new issues
19:39:54 [Paul]
7013
19:40:05 [Bob]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7013
19:41:20 [Paul]
issue accepted
19:41:27 [Paul]
7014
19:41:30 [Bob]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7014
19:42:07 [Paul]
issue accepted
19:42:50 [Paul]
7015
19:42:54 [Bob]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7015
19:43:00 [gpilz]
q+
19:43:31 [Sreed]
Sreed has joined #ws-ra
19:45:12 [Paul]
Geoff: associated with 6398 - wich makes identification of message ambiguous
19:46:04 [Bob]
ack gpi
19:47:12 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.274.aabb
19:47:12 [dug]
q+
19:47:22 [fmaciel]
zakim, aabb is fmaciel
19:47:22 [Zakim]
+fmaciel; got it
19:47:26 [Paul]
Gil: Re formal objection. Does this issue address the issue?
19:47:55 [asir]
q+
19:48:41 [Paul]
Geoff: Objection remains if 7014 is not satisfactory
19:49:35 [Paul]
Bob: Objections help air issues
19:50:34 [dug]
q-
19:50:50 [asir]
q-
19:51:00 [Paul]
Gil: Feels objection was not originally raised as a technical issue
19:51:33 [Paul]
issue accepted
19:51:54 [Paul]
7039 new issue
19:51:58 [Bob]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7039
19:53:33 [Paul]
Doug: EPR identifier. Problem is ref params can be mis-used
19:53:47 [Paul]
.. 1) Remove
19:54:10 [Paul]
.. 2) Clear explanation in spec
19:54:38 [li]
q+
19:54:50 [Bob]
ack li
19:56:19 [Paul]
li: with no identifier how is sub-mgr able to identify message?
19:57:07 [Paul]
issue accepted
19:58:18 [Paul]
Geoff: Mode proposal has been circulated
19:58:41 [gpilz]
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/wiki/Use_Cases_for_6401-6661
19:59:18 [Paul]
Gil: 6401 use cases complete
20:00:21 [li]
q+
20:00:50 [Bob]
acl li
20:00:50 [Paul]
Bob: next step on 6401 is to develop requirements
20:02:13 [Bob]
ack li
20:03:19 [Paul]
Gil: would prefer to produce some proposals
20:03:28 [Wu]
q+
20:03:41 [dug]
q+
20:03:57 [Bob]
ack wu
20:04:42 [Paul]
Wu: Agrees with Bob - we should gather more requirements
20:05:13 [Paul]
Wu: will try to develop requirements
20:06:04 [Bob]
Action: Wu and Team 6401, develop detailed requirements extracted from usecases ref 6401
20:06:04 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-77 - And Team 6401, develop detailed requirements extracted from usecases ref 6401 [on wu chou - due 2009-06-30].
20:06:24 [Bob]
ack dug
20:07:31 [Paul]
Doug: Could proposal owners explain how arrived at their proposals
20:07:45 [dug]
... in the wiki
20:07:53 [Geoff]
q+
20:08:03 [Paul]
TOPIC: issue-6925
20:08:05 [Bob]
ack geoff
20:08:23 [gpilz]
q+
20:08:28 [dug]
q+
20:09:27 [Zakim]
-Asir
20:09:36 [Paul]
Geoff: Have examined how a literal resource can be defined.
20:09:38 [Yves]
s/6925/6975/
20:09:39 [asir]
sorry we got cut off
20:09:48 [asir]
we are dialing back in
20:09:51 [Bob]
resolution: All agreed
20:10:14 [asir]
all agreed with geoff!
20:10:29 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
20:11:33 [Paul]
Geoff: Can definition simply say that the service defines resource
20:11:44 [Bob]
q?
20:11:49 [Bob]
ack gp
20:13:03 [dug]
darn - gil is taking my comment :-)
20:13:29 [Bob]
ack dug
20:14:40 [Paul]
Gil: "literal" must be defined in a broader way than service
20:14:57 [Geoff]
q+
20:15:05 [Bob]
ack geo
20:15:40 [dug]
q+
20:16:40 [Bob]
ack dug
20:16:42 [Paul]
Doug: could schema be used
20:17:48 [asir]
they are sever-specific, similar to HTTP
20:18:03 [asir]
s/sever-specific/service-specific/
20:18:16 [Paul]
Geoff: With schema how can client and service have different understanding of the resource definitions?
20:18:56 [gpilz]
q+
20:19:33 [Paul]
Doug: need a way for service to advertise what is valid XML for a create request
20:19:45 [Bob]
ack gpi
20:20:24 [asir]
well ...
20:20:26 [Paul]
Gil: issue described by Doug sounds like 6401
20:20:53 [asir]
it is upto resource owners to advertise resource descriptions
20:21:03 [asir]
this is orthogonal to transfer
20:21:29 [dug]
q+
20:21:39 [Bob]
ack dug
20:22:25 [Paul]
Doug: "server knows" approach. How does the client know?
20:22:41 [gpilz]
what issue are we discussing?
20:22:50 [Bob]
3975
20:22:55 [Bob]
6975
20:22:57 [gpilz]
q+
20:23:11 [asir]
Transfer is a generic protocol
20:23:25 [dug]
q+
20:23:28 [dug]
"there no interop here" ?
20:23:40 [dug]
s/there/there's/
20:23:48 [asir]
s/interop/interop issue/
20:23:58 [dug]
no I quoted him :-)
20:24:06 [dug]
correctly
20:24:09 [asir]
that is what i heard
20:24:11 [Bob]
aggreed
20:24:20 [Paul]
Geoff: server defines and advertises its resource definitions
20:24:30 [Bob]
ack gpi
20:25:35 [Geoff]
q+
20:25:59 [Paul]
Gil: Sees the use case where client and service are tightly coupled. However there are services that are not data aware
20:26:56 [Bob]
ack dug
20:27:11 [Paul]
Gil: We could remove reference to literal resource rather than define it
20:28:14 [Paul]
Doug: Removing literal resource definition means all data becomes opaque
20:29:20 [Paul]
Doug: How does the client know definition of instructions available
20:29:41 [Bob]
ack geo
20:30:31 [Asir2]
Asir2 has joined #ws-ra
20:31:09 [dug]
q+
20:31:48 [Paul]
Geoff: already feels that Transfer client needs additional information to function. A link between client and service must be defined.
20:31:51 [Bob]
ack dug
20:32:41 [Zakim]
- +91.98.49.99.aaaa
20:33:05 [Zakim]
+ +91.98.49.99.aacc
20:33:15 [Paul]
Doug: feels there are cases when a client may be able to either send an instruction or some literal data. Client needs to know the difference.
20:35:27 [Paul]
Geoff: a policy mechanism to help service sounds useful. However it should only be a hint not strict definition
20:36:08 [Paul]
TOPIC: issue-6413
20:36:17 [dug]
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/9/03/Issue-6413-2009-03-25.html
20:36:24 [Geoff]
q+
20:37:29 [Bob]
ack geo
20:37:38 [Paul]
Geoff: can we take a higher level look at the issue
20:37:58 [Paul]
.. what are the real goals?
20:38:50 [dug]
q+
20:38:56 [Bob]
ack dug
20:39:06 [Paul]
Geoff: is it to force WS-MAN ti implement frag support?
20:39:30 [Paul]
Doug: is it not about WS-MAN
20:40:38 [asir]
Doug mentioned - clear direction to the industry (that includes WS-Man
20:41:15 [Paul]
.. it is for interop and industry direction
20:41:47 [Geoff]
q+
20:42:01 [Bob]
ack geoff
20:42:23 [Bob]
q+
20:42:32 [Yves]
I wonder if the WG should work on a single spec instead of five, to avoid "proliferation"
20:42:45 [dug]
yves +1
20:43:03 [dug]
would help guarantee people make sure they all work together
20:43:04 [Paul]
Bob: mentions that DaveS feels this issue may lead to multiple frag specs being developed
20:44:02 [dug]
q+
20:44:11 [Paul]
Geoff: If we define a good frag spec then it will be used and become adopted
20:45:11 [Paul]
Geoff: we should not fore people to use a frag spec they do not want
20:45:25 [Bob]
ack bob
20:45:48 [Paul]
Bob: how does WS-RT relate to frag support in WS-MAN?
20:46:11 [Paul]
Doug: very simplar
20:46:24 [asir]
q+
20:46:50 [Paul]
Doug: new proposal is different from WS-RT
20:47:41 [Paul]
Doug: header / body main diff.
20:48:19 [Paul]
Bob: if frag support were in WS-T what would be left in RT?
20:48:32 [Bob]
ack asir
20:48:47 [asir]
q+
20:48:50 [Paul]
Doug: other things do remain
20:49:08 [Bob]
ack dug
20:50:05 [Paul]
Doug: aspect 1) framework for frag support. 2) definition of dialects which are open for new definitions.
20:50:36 [Bob]
ack Yv
20:51:45 [Paul]
Yves: do not need to support frags for WS-T, or vice versa.
20:51:52 [Geoff]
agree with Yves
20:51:54 [Bob]
ack asir
20:52:16 [Geoff]
+
20:52:18 [Geoff]
q+
20:53:06 [Bob]
ack geo
20:53:18 [Paul]
Asir: there are many differences between proposal and WS-MAN
20:53:21 [Yves]
for the minutes, to get frags adopter you need a good spec and good implementations, more than sticking it in any other spec
20:53:28 [Yves]
s/adopter/adopted
20:53:36 [asir]
+1 to Yves
20:54:00 [asir]
a good W3C spec that describes frag only is a clear direction to the industry (including WS-Man
20:54:16 [Bob]
q+
20:54:54 [dug]
would we ever say that?
20:55:13 [asir]
s/good W3C/W3C/
20:55:16 [Paul]
Geoff: composability is important. This is is made worse by proposal
20:55:29 [Geoff]
q+
20:57:01 [Paul]
Bob: is it felt a good independant frag spec would encourage adoption?
20:57:44 [Bob]
ack bob
20:58:28 [Paul]
Doug: a lot of spes build extensible support into main spec.
20:58:42 [Bob]
ack geo
21:00:46 [Paul]
Bob: is frag independant or part of WS-T?
21:00:50 [Zakim]
-Vikas
21:00:54 [Zakim]
-fmaciel
21:00:55 [Zakim]
-Wu_Chou
21:00:57 [Zakim]
- +91.98.49.99.aacc
21:00:57 [fmaciel]
fmaciel has left #ws-ra
21:00:58 [Zakim]
-Yves
21:00:58 [Zakim]
-asir
21:01:00 [Zakim]
-Doug_Davis
21:01:00 [Zakim]
-Bob_Freund
21:01:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/06/23-ws-ra-minutes.html Yves
21:01:07 [Zakim]
-Paul
21:01:21 [Zakim]
-Gilbert
21:01:23 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
21:01:24 [Zakim]
Attendees were [Microsoft], Bob_Freund, +91.98.49.99.aaaa, Doug_Davis, Gilbert, Paul, Vikas, Ram, Geoff, Yves, Li, +1.408.274.aabb, fmaciel, +91.98.49.99.aacc
21:01:29 [gpilz]
gpilz has left #ws-ra
21:36:05 [dug]
dug has joined #ws-ra
21:36:27 [dug]
yves - what's the URL to the transcript for today's call?
21:36:43 [dug]
rssagent, where are we?
21:36:58 [dug]
rssagent where am i ?
23:03:34 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ws-ra