IRC log of ws-ra on 2009-12-08

Timestamps are in UTC.

20:28:33 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
20:28:33 [RRSAgent]
logging to
20:28:35 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
20:28:35 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-ra
20:28:37 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
20:28:37 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM already started
20:28:38 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
20:28:38 [trackbot]
Date: 08 December 2009
20:28:51 [Zakim]
20:29:07 [Ram]
Ram has joined #ws-ra
20:29:18 [dug]
20:29:24 [Sreed]
Sreed has joined #ws-ra
20:29:53 [Bob]
new music while waiting feature
20:29:55 [dug]
Love these picts:
20:29:59 [Katy]
Katy has joined #ws-ra
20:30:18 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
20:30:19 [Zakim]
20:30:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.207.827.aabb
20:31:14 [Zakim]
20:31:28 [Wu]
Wu has joined #ws-ra
20:34:31 [Zakim]
20:35:05 [Bob]
scribenick: Li
20:35:24 [Bob]
20:35:26 [MartinC]
MartinC has joined #ws-ra
20:35:30 [li]
TOPIC agenda
20:37:06 [li]
bob: clarify last call issues can be resolved earlier
20:37:17 [li]
agenda agreed
20:37:27 [li]
TOPIC minutes of last meeting
20:37:37 [li]
minutes approved
20:38:05 [li]
TOPIC review of snapshots
20:38:23 [li]
...11/17/2009 revision
20:38:32 [Zakim]
+ +3531803aacc
20:38:55 [li]
snapshots approved and issues therein are closed
20:38:55 [dug]
very hard to hear you martin
20:40:04 [li]
TOPIC xml security x-path discussion thread
20:40:06 [MartinC]
i was on headset mute thats why
20:40:30 [li]
bob: two options
20:40:36 [asir]
20:41:00 [Zakim]
20:41:04 [li]
asir: we need to look at the technical issues before making decisions
20:41:59 [li]
bob: need to make decision before LC
20:42:09 [dug]
sorry - was distracted - what are the two options?
20:42:10 [Bob]
ack asir
20:42:37 [li]
yves: changing behavior vs. changing syntax for LC
20:42:51 [li]
... cannot change behavior for LC
20:43:05 [tomrutt]
tomrutt has joined #ws-ra
20:43:36 [Zakim]
20:43:52 [tomrutt]
tomrutt has joined #ws-ra
20:43:58 [li]
ram: other group should give us issues to address
20:44:26 [li]
bob: to contact fred for issues?
20:46:24 [li]
20:47:15 [li]
ram: will investigate it for the next meeting
20:47:42 [li]
AI: ram to investigate 8176 for the next meeting
20:48:30 [Bob]
Topic: Issue-6463
20:48:32 [dug]
word doc:
20:49:04 [li]
20:49:05 [jeffm]
jeffm has joined #ws-ra
20:49:27 [li]
katy: describe the issue and proposal
20:50:46 [tomrutt]
20:51:00 [dug]
20:52:19 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.970.aadd
20:53:04 [asir]
20:53:04 [fmaciel]
fmaciel has joined #ws-ra
20:53:10 [Bob]
ack asir
20:53:24 [li]
asir: haven't review it yet, but question is...
20:53:44 [li]
... does the proposal cover both examples
20:55:32 [li]
katy: wouldn't object to putting another example
20:56:14 [li]
asir: discuss it next week
20:56:49 [li]
20:56:51 [dug]
20:57:26 [li]
dug: describe the issue and proposal
20:57:27 [dug]
20:58:11 [asir]
q+ to point out
20:58:13 [li]'s a editorial typo
20:58:31 [Bob]
ack asir
20:58:31 [Zakim]
asir, you wanted to point out
20:58:51 [asir]
20:59:29 [li]
asir: agree it's a typo but also has non-editorial consequence
21:00:02 [li]
asir: the constraint at the table needs to be captured somhow
21:00:15 [li]
21:00:44 [li]
dug: needs proposed text to proceed
21:01:04 [li]
AI: dug to refine proposal for 8200
21:01:21 [li]
21:01:27 [dug]
21:01:38 [Bob]
ack dug
21:02:41 [li]
asir and dug to clarify this issue from ashok
21:03:00 [li]
asir: looks ok
21:04:14 [li]
bob: any objection to resolving it?
21:04:30 [li]
bob: the issue is resolved
21:04:51 [asir]
is there a 3B?
21:05:10 [li]
21:05:45 [Zakim]
21:05:53 [li]
bob: anybody speaking for gil?
21:06:13 [Zakim]
21:06:26 [tomrutt]
tomrutt has joined #ws-ra
21:06:36 [dug]
21:06:57 [Bob]
ack dug
21:06:57 [li]
ram: should say MUST generate and MAY transmit
21:07:40 [li]
dug: should make this global for all specs
21:08:10 [li]
AI: ram to define "generate fault" for 8283
21:08:30 [li]
21:09:10 [li]
bob: any objection to the proposal?
21:09:27 [li]
bob: issue resolved as proposed
21:09:30 [tomrutt]
tomrutt has joined #ws-ra
21:09:52 [li]
21:10:34 [dug]
Filtering occurs prior to any formatting of notification messages.
21:10:51 [dug]
Context Node: the root of the event XML.
21:11:07 [li]
dug: section 2.3 clarifies the issue already
21:11:44 [Ram]
21:11:54 [Bob]
ack ram
21:12:51 [li]
ram: cwna sounds good
21:13:23 [li]
bob: issue cwna but needs response to author
21:13:46 [li]
AI: dug to respond to issue 8323
21:13:55 [dug]
and cc comments list
21:14:03 [Bob]
email to reviewer and cc public comments list
21:14:05 [Zakim]
21:14:44 [li]
21:15:17 [li]
bob: any objection?
21:15:22 [tomrutt]
tomrutt has joined #ws-ra
21:15:25 [li]
dug: yes
21:16:01 [li]
...confused about the first child element
21:16:09 [li]
...need to discuss with gil
21:16:27 [li]
21:16:52 [li]
dug: describe the issue
21:17:09 [li]
bob: any objection?
21:17:43 [li]
ram: why need this for enumeration?
21:18:19 [li]
dug: same reason for ws-e, as enum items can be empty as well
21:19:16 [li]
ram: it's different and will talk with dug in detail
21:19:31 [li]
21:19:57 [li]
dug: describe the issue
21:20:34 [li]
...and propose option 1
21:20:48 [li]
ram: what is the reason for option 1?
21:21:30 [li]
dug: explain the reason for resource limited devices
21:21:38 [li]
ram: looks fine
21:21:48 [li]
bob: resolve issue with proposal 1
21:22:13 [Zakim]
21:22:16 [li]
21:22:34 [li]
dug: describe the issue
21:23:12 [li]
ram: looks good
21:23:22 [li]
bob: issue resolved as proposed
21:23:36 [li]
21:24:39 [li]
dug: should be consistent with ws-e
21:24:49 [li]
bob: issue resolved as proposed
21:25:00 [li]
21:25:23 [li]
dug: describe the issue
21:26:03 [li]
ram: have question
21:27:30 [li]
...will do more research
21:28:12 [li]
21:28:24 [li]
dug: describe the issue
21:29:18 [li]
ram: fine with it
21:29:35 [li]
bob: issue resolved as proposed
21:29:55 [li]
21:30:08 [li]
dug: describe the issue
21:30:43 [li]
...proposed to remove the sentence
21:30:54 [Zakim]
- +984999aaaa
21:31:10 [li]
bob: issue resolved as proposed
21:31:23 [Zakim]
+ +984999aaee
21:31:38 [li]
21:31:58 [li]
dug: resolved already
21:32:16 [li]
21:33:15 [Zakim]
21:33:16 [li]
dug/ram: agree in general but needs concrete text
21:33:36 [li]
AI: gil to propose concrete text for 8292
21:33:36 [Zakim]
21:33:42 [tomrutt]
tomrutt has joined #ws-ra
21:33:47 [Ram]
Ram has joined #ws-ra
21:34:28 [li]
21:34:42 [dug]
21:34:51 [Bob]
ack dug
21:35:12 [li]
dug: what are the differences between two versions of wsdl?
21:35:45 [li]
ram: one is a profile of wsdl 1.1 with restrictions
21:36:26 [asir]
21:36:35 [li]
ram: it's not clear how the profile is applicable to other use cases
21:36:54 [Bob]
ack asir
21:37:20 [li]
asir: bp 1.1 limits wsdl to soap 1.1 and http, not other soap or transports
21:37:47 [Wu]
21:37:53 [Bob]
ack wu
21:37:57 [li]
...not good to take a blank restriction on wsdl 1.1
21:38:21 [dug]
21:38:35 [li]
wu: agree with asir, we should support both bp 1.1 and wsdl 1.1
21:38:49 [Bob]
ack dug
21:38:51 [li]
...suggest cwna
21:39:14 [tomrutt]
21:39:42 [li]
dug: does bp 1.1 limit binding to http only?
21:39:52 [li]
ram: is checking bp 1.1
21:40:32 [Bob]
ack tom
21:41:02 [li]
tom: wsdl 1.1 schema is fixed by bp 1.1 schemas
21:41:20 [asir]
21:41:26 [li]
tom: need to consider the diff on schemas before closing it
21:41:28 [Bob]
ack asir
21:41:43 [tomrutt]
tomrutt has joined #ws-ra
21:41:58 [li]
asir: can implementations be ws-ra and bp compliant as well?
21:42:53 [li]
asir: there is no blocking for people to implement ws-ra and bp 1.1
21:43:08 [dug]
21:43:16 [Wu]
21:43:24 [Bob]
ack dug
21:43:34 [li]
bob: is there any wsdl in ws-ra that violates bp 1.1?
21:43:56 [Wu]
21:44:12 [li]
dug: profiling wsdl may be too restrictive while restricting it is ok
21:44:27 [dug]
21:44:29 [li]
dug: ok with cwna after talking with gil
21:44:56 [Wu]
wu: ok with cwna
21:45:14 [asir]
Asir: ok with CWNA
21:45:25 [li]
AI: dug to take comments for cwna to the list
21:45:51 [li]
21:47:25 [dug]
21:47:27 [Bob]
21:48:07 [dug]
thanks yves!
21:48:08 [Ram]
21:48:09 [dug]
21:48:34 [Bob]
yves, cat you make a cron job to clear dug?
21:48:44 [dug]
21:48:51 [dug]
its pretty consistent about it too
21:49:00 [li]
ram: discuss it offline
21:49:01 [Wu]
21:49:17 [Bob]
ack wu
21:49:31 [dug]
21:49:51 [li]
wu: polling many events is ok while polling for one may be overkill
21:50:04 [Bob]
ack ram
21:50:16 [li]
...could suggest using getstatus instead of mc polling
21:50:24 [Bob]
ack dug
21:50:54 [li]
dug: subscription end provides more info than getstatus
21:51:38 [li]
wu: subscription end polling creates a lot overhead
21:52:23 [li]
dug: subscription end poll is the same poll for other events
21:53:11 [li]
wu: endto is different from notifyto by spec, as the default of endto is "not to send"
21:53:47 [li]
dug: sharing EPR is an implementation choice
21:54:41 [li]
...spec needs to give choices to implementations
21:55:54 [li]
wu: we need to coordinate endto and notifyto
21:56:42 [li]
... or treat no-addressable endto as not usable
21:57:23 [asir]
21:57:40 [li]
AI: dug to modify proposal to address concern for 8164
21:57:54 [Ram]
Wordsmithing: "Likewise, the wse:EndTo element MAY choose to supportmechanisms, such as the [WS-MakeConnection] specification, to enable delivery of the SubscriptionEnd message from the Subscription Manager."
21:58:30 [tomrutt]
tomrutt has left #ws-ra
21:58:30 [li]
bob: adjourn 40 sec early
21:58:37 [li]
21:58:39 [Zakim]
21:58:40 [Zakim]
21:58:40 [Zakim]
21:58:41 [Zakim]
21:58:41 [Zakim]
- +984999aaee
21:58:43 [Zakim]
21:58:43 [Zakim]
- +1.408.970.aadd
21:58:46 [Zakim]
21:58:51 [Zakim]
- +1.207.827.aabb
21:59:00 [Bob]
rrsagent, generate minutes
21:59:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Bob
21:59:40 [MartinC]
MartinC has left #ws-ra
22:01:59 [Zakim]
- +3531803aacc
22:02:01 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
22:02:02 [Zakim]
Attendees were Mark_Little, [IPcaller], [IBM], Bob_Freund, +984999aaaa, [Microsoft], Wu_Chou, +1.207.827.aabb, Yves, Tom_Rutt, +3531803aacc, +1.408.970.aadd, +984999aaee
22:17:07 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra