IRC log of ws-ra on 2009-09-01

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:23:29 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
19:23:29 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-ws-ra-irc
19:23:31 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:23:31 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-ra
19:23:33 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
19:23:33 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
19:23:34 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
19:23:34 [trackbot]
Date: 01 September 2009
19:23:38 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has now started
19:23:45 [Zakim]
+[IBM]
19:24:18 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:25:00 [Zakim]
+Bob_Freund
19:26:20 [Paul]
Paul has joined #ws-ra
19:26:52 [Tom_Rutt]
Tom_Rutt has joined #ws-ra
19:27:41 [Bob]
chair: Bob Freund
19:27:48 [Zakim]
+ +25625669aaaa
19:28:16 [Bob]
zakim, aaaa is Paul
19:28:16 [Zakim]
+Paul; got it
19:28:29 [Zakim]
+Tom_Rutt
19:29:08 [Zakim]
+Igor_Sedukhin
19:29:19 [Zakim]
+??P9
19:29:25 [li]
li has joined #ws-ra
19:29:39 [Zakim]
+Vikas
19:30:21 [Zakim]
+li
19:30:37 [gpilz]
gpilz has joined #ws-ra
19:30:50 [Zakim]
+gpilz
19:30:54 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #ws-ra
19:31:14 [DaveS]
DaveS has joined #ws-ra
19:31:31 [Zakim]
+Yves
19:31:52 [Zakim]
+Ashok_Malhotra
19:32:43 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
19:32:50 [Bob]
agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0087.html
19:33:23 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
19:33:26 [Ram]
Ram has joined #ws-ra
19:34:19 [Bob]
scribe: Vikas Varma
19:34:21 [Tom_Rutt]
Tom_Rutt has joined #ws-ra
19:34:28 [Bob]
scribenick: Vikas
19:35:05 [Sreed]
Sreed has joined #ws-ra
19:35:57 [Bob]
Agenda - agreed
19:36:41 [Bob]
Resolution: Minutes of 2009-08-25 approved w/o
19:38:06 [Vikas1]
Vikas1 has joined #ws-ra
19:38:40 [dug]
the term "normal company" could be hard to define
19:39:02 [Vikas1]
Bob, can you mark Vikas1 as scribe.
19:39:48 [Bob]
scribenick: Vikas1
19:41:07 [Vikas1]
Topic: action item review.
19:42:39 [Vikas1]
Topic: Progress with initial draft of WS-Frag
19:43:44 [Vikas1]
Dug/Ram : Going through internal review
19:44:15 [Vikas1]
Dog/Ram : Will try to put the proposal before next call.
19:45:02 [dug]
129.33.49.251
19:45:35 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:46:19 [Vikas2]
Vikas2 has joined #ws-ra
19:46:39 [Bob]
scribenick: Vikas2
19:47:48 [Bob]
resolution: Open 7429 w/o
19:47:57 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:48:17 [Bob]
resolution: issue-7429 resolved with proposal in bugzilla w/o
19:49:01 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:49:02 [Yves]
dug, hsould be ok now
19:49:21 [dug]
yep - works thanks!
19:49:37 [Bob]
resolution Issue-7430 opened w/o
19:50:15 [Bob]
resolution: Issue 7430 resolved with proposal in bugzilla
19:50:34 [Bob]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7478
19:51:09 [Bob]
scribenick: Vikas
19:51:37 [Vikas]
yes Bob
19:54:02 [Vikas]
resolution: Issue-7478 opened w/o.
19:54:16 [asir]
when do we stop opening issues :-)
19:54:46 [dug]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Sep/att-0004/ws-eventing-6401-6-dug5.doc
19:55:35 [dug]
yves - failing again
19:55:41 [Vikas]
ACTION: Gilbert to provide proposal on 7478
19:55:41 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-99 - Provide proposal on 7478 [on Gilbert Pilz - due 2009-09-08].
19:56:06 [gpilz]
q+
19:56:24 [dug]
Yves - IP is: 129.33.49.251
19:56:25 [Bob]
ack gpi
19:57:21 [gpilz]
q+
19:57:36 [Bob]
ack gpi
19:57:51 [asir]
q+
19:57:56 [dug]
yves - working again - thanks
19:58:00 [Vikas]
Ram: Is it necessary to define a seperate mine-type.
19:58:15 [Bob]
asir
19:58:21 [Bob]
ack asir
19:59:16 [dug]
what does that involve?
19:59:21 [dug]
(the process)
19:59:23 [Bob]
application
19:59:52 [Vikas]
Bob: Is there any objection to define a new mime-type?
20:00:02 [Ashok]
I understand that getting a new mime type is a long drawn-out process
20:00:05 [asir]
q+
20:00:12 [Bob]
ack asir
20:00:54 [Vikas]
Gil: Suggest to drive it as a seperate issue.
20:02:32 [gpilz]
q+
20:02:41 [dug]
thanks
20:03:15 [gpilz]
q-
20:05:12 [asir]
Good!
20:05:20 [Vikas]
RESOLUTION: No objection on the latest proposal. 6401 resolved with comment 12.
20:05:42 [li]
you're welcome
20:05:53 [Bob]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6694
20:05:56 [Zakim]
+JeffM
20:06:18 [Ram]
Proposed resolution for 6694: "An endpoint MAY indicate that it supports WS-Eventing, or its features, by including the WS-Eventing Policy assertion(s) within its WSDL. By doing so the endpoint is indicating that the corresponding WS-Eventing operations are supported by that endpoint even they do not explicitly appear in its WSDL”.
20:06:42 [dug]
q+
20:07:14 [Bob]
ack dug
20:07:17 [dug]
ram - s/even/even though/ right?
20:11:00 [asir]
Vow, two big issues out of the way!!
20:11:10 [asir]
quite a day!
20:11:10 [Vikas]
No objection on the latest proposal. 6694 6401 resolved with comment 7 and 8.
20:11:22 [Vikas]
s/6401/
20:11:29 [asir]
s/6401//
20:12:29 [dug]
he's just hiding
20:13:26 [Bob]
Topic: Infoset
20:14:28 [Ram]
q+
20:14:45 [Bob]
ack ram
20:15:09 [DaveS]
What issue number are we talking about?
20:15:18 [Ashok]
6700
20:15:29 [Bob]
Issue 6700 et alia
20:16:36 [Ram]
q+
20:16:42 [Bob]
ack ram
20:17:44 [dug]
q+
20:18:31 [Ram]
q+
20:18:43 [Bob]
ack dug
20:18:48 [li]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0064.html
20:19:01 [dug]
This specification is defined in terms of XML 1.0. A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as described below, and it is recommended that this should be used for any non-XML serializations.
20:19:50 [Bob]
ack ram
20:20:13 [Bob]
ack yves
20:21:09 [dug]
This specification is defined in terms of XML 1.0. A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as described in the Infoset specification [http:...], and it is recommended that this should be used for any non-XML serializations. See the Infoset specification for more details.
20:21:20 [li]
q+
20:21:24 [dug]
q+
20:21:28 [Bob]
proposal for resolution of 6700, 6701, 6702,6703, and 6704
20:21:37 [Bob]
ack li
20:22:08 [Ram]
Amended proposal: This specification is defined in terms of XML 1.0. A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as described in the Infoset specification [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/], and it is recommended that this should be used for any non-XML serializations.
20:22:23 [li]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Sep/0003.html
20:22:30 [dug]
Ram - add the final sentence (para)
20:22:34 [Ashok]
Yves, are you ok with Ram's wording?
20:23:42 [Ram]
Doug - I got rid of the last para and merged it into the first para. That is, the ref to Infoset spec is in this first para.
20:23:51 [Yves]
not really, it is important to say that the spec is defined in terms on Infoset and not XML1.0
20:24:02 [asir]
q+
20:24:07 [dug]
ok - as long as people don't want the "see XXX for more details"
20:24:13 [dug]
guess its just noise
20:24:14 [dug]
q-
20:24:23 [Bob]
ack asir
20:24:27 [Ashok]
Yes, that's what I thought ... on second thought I agree with that
20:24:29 [Yves]
see http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#reltoxml and http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapenv
20:25:17 [Yves]
[[A SOAP message is specified as an XML infoset whose comment, element, attribute, namespace and character information items are able to be serialized as XML 1.0.]]
20:25:39 [dug]
q+
20:25:49 [Bob]
ack dug
20:26:35 [Tom_Rutt_]
Tom_Rutt_ has joined #ws-ra
20:26:43 [asir]
q+
20:26:58 [Bob]
ack asir
20:26:58 [Yves]
In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0064.html, if we add a sentence saying that valid infosets for this specification are ones serializable using XML 1.0 should be enough
20:28:04 [Ashok]
q+
20:28:11 [li]
yves, that link is broken
20:28:59 [Bob]
ashok
20:29:03 [Bob]
ack ashok
20:29:51 [Ram]
Amended proposal: This specification is defined in terms of XML 1.0. A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as described in the Infoset specification [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/], and it is recommended that this should be used for any non-XML serializations. Valid infosets for this specification are ones serializable using XML 1.0.
20:30:25 [dug]
q+
20:30:40 [Yves]
well, that prevents in a way serialization of an infoset into something else, better say that it's an infoset and restricted to serialization in XML1.0
20:32:00 [Yves]
proposal: This specification is defined in terms of XML Information Set (Infoset)
20:32:08 [Yves]
, even though the specification uses XML 1.0
20:32:09 [Yves]
terminology.
20:32:47 [Yves]
Valid Infoset for this specification are the one serializable in XML 1.0, hence the use of XML 1.0.
20:33:22 [gpilz]
q+
20:33:45 [asir]
q+
20:33:47 [Bob]
ack dug
20:34:17 [Bob]
ack yves
20:35:37 [jeffm]
jeffm has joined #ws-ra
20:36:52 [Bob]
ack gpi
20:37:19 [Ram]
Minor amendment to Yves's proposal: This specification is defined in terms of XML Information Set (Infoset) [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/], even though the specification uses XML 1.0 terminology. Valid Infoset for this specification are the one serializable in XML 1.0, hence the use of XML 1.0.
20:38:01 [Ram]
q+
20:38:22 [Bob]
ack ram
20:38:24 [Bob]
ack asir
20:38:37 [asir]
This sounds like the min to close all our infoset issues
20:38:43 [dug]
q+
20:39:36 [asir]
I think the third para is already represented in the above proposal
20:39:59 [Bob]
ack dug
20:40:37 [asir]
Would Doug be okay if we were to say ...
20:40:47 [asir]
This spec can be used in terms of ....
20:41:22 [Bob]
despite all appearances, this spec is defined (somewhere in a non-disclosed location) in Infoset Notation
20:41:53 [asir]
..
20:41:54 [asir]
This specification can be used in terms of XML Information Set (Infoset) [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/], even though the specification uses XML 1.0 terminology. Valid Infoset for this specification are the one serializable in XML 1.0, hence the use of XML 1.0.
20:42:28 [asir]
:-)
20:43:05 [asir]
Vow .. we closed 8 issues today.
20:43:31 [asir]
i stand corrected 10 issues
20:43:50 [DaveS]
Can we go home erly?
20:43:58 [dug]
end on a high note?
20:45:07 [Bob]
cwna for 6424
20:45:10 [li]
and i didn't even say a word
20:45:12 [asir]
vow .. that is 11
20:45:32 [dug]
sure
20:45:58 [Vikas]
RESOLUTION: No objection on the latest proposal put forward in the chat room for 6700, 6701, 6702, 6703, and 6704.
20:46:07 [Vikas]
RESOLUTION: 6424 closed with no action.
20:46:39 [Yves]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0082.html
20:48:13 [Vikas]
Topic : Issue 6533
20:48:34 [DaveS]
q+
20:49:41 [Bob]
ack dave
20:53:20 [asir]
Standalone makes sense
20:53:32 [DaveS]
+1 to standalone
20:53:39 [asir]
Where will we add this para?
20:57:32 [dug]
I'm assuming that the non-Get ops in Transfer are non-safe so a ref to (b) should be added - the proposal doesn't actually say that.
20:57:34 [dug]
q+
20:59:19 [Bob]
ack dug
21:00:55 [asir]
that's a dozen
21:01:02 [asir]
do you want to try a bakers dozen?
21:01:09 [DaveS]
bye
21:01:25 [Zakim]
-??P9
21:01:51 [Zakim]
-Yves
21:01:53 [Zakim]
-[Microsoft]
21:01:53 [Zakim]
-Paul
21:01:53 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
21:01:55 [Zakim]
-JeffM
21:01:56 [Zakim]
-[IBM]
21:01:58 [Zakim]
-Bob_Freund
21:01:58 [Zakim]
-Vikas
21:01:58 [Zakim]
-gpilz
21:01:58 [Zakim]
-Ashok_Malhotra
21:02:05 [Zakim]
-li
21:02:14 [Zakim]
-Igor_Sedukhin
21:02:33 [Bob]
resolution: Issue-6533 resolved with the proposal contained in comment #4 and comment # 6
21:03:09 [Bob]
rsagent, generate minutes
21:03:17 [Bob]
rrsagent, generate minutes
21:03:17 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-ws-ra-minutes.html Bob
21:07:14 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, Tom_Rutt, in WS_WSRA()3:30PM
21:07:15 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
21:07:17 [Zakim]
Attendees were [IBM], Bob_Freund, +25625669aaaa, Paul, Tom_Rutt, Igor_Sedukhin, Vikas, li, gpilz, Yves, Ashok_Malhotra, [Microsoft], JeffM
21:36:57 [gpilz]
gpilz has left #ws-ra
21:49:42 [dug]
dug has joined #ws-ra