IRC log of soap-jms on 2009-10-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:59:23 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #soap-jms
15:59:23 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:59:25 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:59:25 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #soap-jms
15:59:27 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SJMS
15:59:27 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM scheduled to start in 1 minute
15:59:28 [trackbot]
Meeting: SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Teleconference
15:59:28 [trackbot]
Date: 13 October 2009
15:59:47 [Zakim]
WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM has now started
15:59:54 [Zakim]
16:01:09 [Derek]
Derek has joined #soap-jms
16:01:30 [Zakim]
16:01:41 [padams]
padams has joined #soap-jms
16:02:08 [Zakim]
16:02:29 [mphillip]
mphillip has joined #soap-jms
16:02:52 [eric]
eric has joined #soap-jms
16:02:58 [Zakim]
16:03:18 [padams]
Zakim, who is here?
16:03:18 [Zakim]
On the phone I see alewis, padams, eric, Derek
16:03:19 [Zakim]
On IRC I see eric, mphillip, padams, Derek, Zakim, RRSAgent, alewis, trackbot, Yves
16:04:13 [eric]
Mark, are you going to join us on the phone?
16:05:05 [mphillip]
yes, just dialling
16:05:18 [Zakim]
16:05:56 [eric]
Scribe: Mark
16:05:59 [mphillip]
TOPIC 1) Appointment of the scribe
16:06:32 [mphillip]
TOPIC: Approval of prior meeting minutes
16:06:32 [mphillip]
Last calls:
16:06:32 [mphillip]
16:06:44 [mphillip]
No objections to minutes
16:06:59 [mphillip]
TOPIC: Review the agenda
16:07:32 [mphillip]
No objections to Agenda
16:07:37 [mphillip]
TOPIC: Review action items
16:07:44 [mphillip]
16:07:55 [mphillip]
Eric: No progress on outstanding actions
16:08:02 [mphillip]
Derek: Has started on FAQ
16:08:40 [mphillip]
Mark: Slow progress should finish action next week
16:08:55 [mphillip]
TOPIC: URI specification
16:09:17 [mphillip]
Eric: Some progress with Oracle - hoping for more next week
16:09:23 [mphillip]
TOPIC: Raised issues
16:09:35 [mphillip]
16:09:39 [mphillip]
TOPIC: Accepting proposals to close open issues
16:09:47 [mphillip]
Issue 14:
16:14:21 [mphillip]
Discussion on Section 3.4.2:
16:14:39 [mphillip]
Eric: Outlined proposed changes
16:14:49 [mphillip]
Mark: Is there an assertion for this?
16:14:55 [mphillip]
Eric: No
16:15:28 [mphillip]
Phil: ...and that may be OK - if the transport value is not set to that value then it is not SOAP/JMS
16:17:25 [mphillip]
Eric: Someone else could invent an alternative SOAP/JMS protocol which uses a different transport, and that would not conform to this spec.
16:18:19 [mphillip]
Amy: There is a core SOAP/JMS binding spec with no Service Description, and 2 optional sections for WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2
16:18:55 [mphillip]
Phil: So someone can claim compliance for the core binding spec, but not the extensions?
16:19:01 [mphillip]
Amy: Correct
16:20:06 [mphillip]
Phil: IBM WebSphere would like to claim compliance for the core spec. without WSDL - only a URI is required by the client
16:21:36 [mphillip]
Amy: As long as IBM does not claim compliance for WSDL then that is OK (assuming compliance to the core )
16:22:19 [mphillip]
Mark: Our WSDL tests should all check for a valid SOAP/JMS transport value (other values are valid but they would not be compliant, and the test should fail)
16:23:14 [mphillip]
Mark: So we should have an assertion for this statement
16:23:39 [mphillip]
Phil: What would the assertion say? Shouldn't we document the exception that must be thrown?
16:24:03 [mphillip]
Amy: No, failing the assertion just means that the WSDL is not relevant to us
16:24:25 [mphillip]
Phil: So it could be a valid WSDL, but not spec. compliant
16:25:47 [mphillip]
Eric: We *could* restate this "the SOAP/JMS binding is in use if, and only if, the transport attribute has the SOAP/JMS value"
16:27:32 [mphillip]
Eric: So if IBM was happy with just having a SOAP/JMS URI in the WSDL (and not the transport attribute ) then the IBM implementation would not be compliant with the WSDL extensions in the spec. (but could be compliant with the core)
16:30:44 [mphillip]
Eric: But then the WSDL may not be WS-I compliant if it used the SOAP/HTTP value in the transport and a SOAP/JMS URI
16:33:49 [mphillip]
Eric: So the question is, should this be a normative statement
16:34:37 [mphillip]
Amy: Yes, it gives us a threshold - if the transport is not set to this value then no further checks are required - the WSDL is not conformant to the SOAP/JMS spec.
16:37:02 [mphillip]
Amy: A compliant vendor should not treat a WSDL without this transport value as SOAP/JMS
16:37:50 [mphillip]
Amy: This is a binary on/off switch to determine SOAP/JMS WSDL
16:40:54 [mphillip]
All are fine with Eric's proposed wording for 3.4.2
16:42:22 [mphillip]
Eric: propose adding a sentence to Section 3.4.5 which mandates a jms: URI in the @location
16:43:57 [mphillip]
Mark: This bounds the scope of the spec. to only supporting the URI we have defined - and so is a sensible addition
16:44:01 [mphillip]
Phil: Agreed
16:45:23 [mphillip]
Phil: The sentence states "although the "soap" prefix corresponds " - the prefix is not "soap"
16:45:45 [mphillip]
action eric to correct the "soap" prefix reference in section 3.4.5
16:45:45 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-116 - Correct the "soap" prefix reference in section 3.4.5 [on Eric Johnson - due 2009-10-20].
16:46:41 [mphillip]
RESOLUTION: all approve the proposal for 3.4.5
16:49:46 [mphillip]
Eric: propose we make the corresponding changes in Section 3.5 for WSDL2
16:59:58 [mphillip]
Mark Questioning SHOULD vs. MUST on the statement about using URI
17:00:33 [mphillip]
RESOLUTION: All agreed the proposed resolution to Isuue 14
17:00:57 [mphillip]
action Phil to make the updates for issue 14
17:00:58 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-117 - Make the updates for issue 14 [on Phil Adams - due 2009-10-20].
17:01:01 [Zakim]
17:01:02 [Zakim]
17:01:03 [Zakim]
17:01:04 [Zakim]
17:01:06 [Zakim]
17:01:07 [Zakim]
WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM has ended
17:01:09 [Zakim]
Attendees were alewis, padams, eric, Derek, mphillip
17:01:09 [mphillip]
Out of time
17:01:35 [mphillip]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:01:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate mphillip
17:01:36 [mphillip]
rrsagent, make log public
17:01:44 [mphillip]
rrsagent, publish minutes
17:01:44 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate mphillip
17:04:01 [mphillip]
rrsagent, make log public
17:09:49 [eric]
eric has left #soap-jms
17:19:15 [mphillip]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:19:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate mphillip
17:19:31 [padams]
padams has left #soap-jms
17:40:54 [mphillip]
mphillip has left #soap-jms
18:33:14 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #soap-jms