See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 18 August 2009
<scribe> Scribe: peaston
Everyon: looks fine
close: Action-103
close action-103
<trackbot> ACTION-103 Make the Issue-2 changes consistent with Issue-1 closed
close action-104
<trackbot> ACTION-104 reapply the resolution for issue 6 (remove JMS Priority) closed
<eric> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/open
Phil to send email with more specific proposal Issue 9
<eric> Discussion of issue 10: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/10
Issue 10 proposal is accepted
<scribe> ACTION: phil to apply issue 10 proposal [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/18-soap-jms-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-105 - Apply issue 10 proposal [on Phil Adams - due 2009-08-25].
<eric> (Added to agenda - discussion of applied resolution of 8)
<eric> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Aug/0018.html
<eric> About section C.2: http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html#soap-request-with-attachments
<eric> My original proposal to resolve: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Aug/0003.html
Consensus - revise wording to be JMS message type neutral and use content vs body
Apply to C1 also
Therefore Action-102 should be applied using new proposed language in email
COnsensus: All agree
<eric> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html?rev=1.58&content-type=text/html&f=h
Consensus: All agree to resolution of issue 7 as applied
<eric> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/wiki/2008-09_FAQ
Do we need a UDDI FAQ
<scribe> ACTION: Eric to propose UDDI FAQ [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/18-soap-jms-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - Propose UDDI FAQ [on Eric Johnson - due 2009-08-25].
<scribe> ACTION: Phil to regen testing tables etc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/18-soap-jms-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-107 - Regen testing tables etc [on Phil Adams - due 2009-08-25].
Most test cases leverage the endpoint defn without the wsdl
Phil: some endpoint expressed tests could be done as WSDL tests
eric: i.e reuse existing test cases ?
we could redo our tests to have a wsdl form vs an ep form
eric: lets do an example of this for one of our tests?
Action eric to come up with a more concrete proposal on the wsdl testing
<trackbot> Created ACTION-108 - Come up with a more concrete proposal on the wsdl testing [on Eric Johnson - due 2009-08-25].
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: peaston Inferring ScribeNick: peaston WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: Everyon Peter_Easton Phil Yves alewis close eric joined soap-jms trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Found Date: 18 Aug 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/08/18-soap-jms-minutes.html People with action items: eric phil WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]