IRC log of ws-ra on 2010-01-27

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:56:40 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
16:56:40 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:56:42 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:56:42 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-ra
16:56:44 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
16:56:44 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA(F2F)11:00AM scheduled to start 56 minutes ago
16:56:45 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
16:56:45 [trackbot]
Date: 27 January 2010
16:57:42 [asoldano]
asoldano has joined #ws-ra
16:59:53 [Ram]
Ram has joined #ws-ra
16:59:55 [Bob]
Bob has joined #ws-ra
17:00:54 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA(F2F)11:00AM has now started
17:01:05 [Zakim]
17:01:22 [Bob]
trackbot, start telecon
17:01:23 [Zakim]
17:01:24 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
17:01:26 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
17:01:26 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see WS_WSRA(F2F)11:00AM already started
17:01:27 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
17:01:27 [trackbot]
Date: 27 January 2010
17:01:40 [Bob]
rrsagent, this meting spans midnight
17:01:40 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'this meting spans midnight', Bob. Try /msg RRSAgent help
17:01:47 [Bob]
rrsagent, this meting spans midnight
17:01:47 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'this meting spans midnight', Bob. Try /msg RRSAgent help
17:01:48 [Tom_Rutt]
Tom_Rutt has joined #ws-ra
17:02:01 [Bob]
rrsagent, this meeting spans midnight
17:02:02 [Tom_Rutt]
what is the conference code today?
17:02:07 [Bob]
17:02:49 [Bob]
17:02:54 [Zakim]
17:03:22 [DaveS]
DaveS has joined #ws-ra
17:03:58 [Zakim]
17:05:43 [Zakim]
17:05:56 [Bob]
scribenick: Sreed
17:06:36 [Sreed]
Bob: Minutes of meeting - Jan 26 is approved
17:07:12 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
17:08:25 [Zakim]
17:08:28 [Zakim]
17:08:30 [Sreed]
Bob: WSRA F2F is coming up with Redmond Microsoft campus Mar 30th to April 1st
17:10:47 [Sreed]
Bob: Any objection related to WSRA F2F meeting to be scheduled on Mar 30th to Apr 1st
17:12:04 [li]
li has joined #ws-ra
17:12:55 [Zakim]
17:13:02 [Sreed]
Bob: Follow-up F2F end of May
17:13:34 [Sreed]
Ram: Last week of Jun is fine (22nd to 24th)
17:14:50 [Sreed]
Yves: will host next F2F meeting
17:16:28 [dug]
s/will/can/ :-)
17:18:44 [Wu]
Wu has joined #ws-ra
17:19:19 [Sreed]
Bob: The next F2F proposed in Jun 15th to 17th
17:19:57 [Zakim]
17:21:42 [Sreed]
Bob: F2F meeting - Jun 15th to 17th in Sophia, France
17:23:11 [Sreed]
17:23:24 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 8205
17:24:28 [Zakim]
17:24:32 [Sreed]
dug: Minor spec unique more than one meta resource is associated - MEX Data element
17:24:50 [Sreed]
Asir: Need to understand the value
17:24:55 [Zakim]
17:25:46 [Sreed]
dug: Two meta data resources both fo them MEX meta data element - two docs, not able to combine need to keep it separate
17:26:20 [Sreed]
Asir: MEX data container attribute extensibility that changes the semantics?
17:26:53 [Sreed]
dug: Adding an attribute extensibility addtionally qualifies in the MEX data element - information
17:27:27 [Sreed]
Asir: Need to look into a concreate example on this
17:27:45 [Sreed]
Ashok: what would be situation related to this
17:28:29 [Sreed]
dug: merge meta data elements together
17:28:55 [Sreed]
Asir: I am not seeing much value to this
17:29:17 [Sreed]
Asir: I would like to undertand the value
17:29:50 [Sreed]
DaveS: What semantic would you attach to the spec in related to this
17:31:51 [Sreed]
Asir: If you are changing the semantics if you are adding/changing - relationship - just modfied the representation
17:33:33 [Sreed]
dug: MEX meta data create a sub class - extensibility point changes to semantics of sub class
17:34:11 [Sreed]
dug: not changing the basic semantics
17:34:14 [Zakim]
17:35:13 [Bob]
q+ jeffM
17:35:39 [Sreed]
Gil: logical conclusion - section level it should be fine
17:36:26 [Sreed]
dug: there is inconsistent in the spec now
17:36:41 [Bob]
ack jeff
17:37:43 [dug]
17:37:57 [Sreed]
jeffM: addiing semantics doesnt change the scope
17:38:41 [Bob]
ack dug
17:38:42 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
17:38:58 [Sreed]
dug: Trying to understand what the problem in making the changes
17:41:04 [Sreed]
Asir: It can be represented using the exisiting for making the change provide the information that would help to articulate others
17:42:58 [Sreed]
Bob: Extensibiility elements - there is no way of scoping the extensions - in this case there is no change in the semabtics of the parent
17:44:22 [Sreed]
Gil: merge extended meta data at the section level
17:45:19 [Zakim]
17:49:07 [Sreed]
Ram: Attribute extensibilty element violates unique constraint then need to discuss
17:49:41 [Sreed]
dug: can't merge them in this case
17:50:10 [MartinC]
17:50:28 [Sreed]
Gil: extend meta data element - fix one of them remove attribute extensibility or unique constraint
17:51:30 [Sreed]
Asir: 7986 attaching the policy what you do for attribute extensibility?
17:53:07 [Sreed]
Bob: members accepting Dug's proposal
17:54:28 [Sreed]
Asir: what is the compelling argument -related to attribute extensbility
17:57:05 [gpilz]
gpilz has joined #ws-ra
17:57:29 [Wu]
17:57:47 [Sreed]
Ashok: Technical arugument - lot better in this semantic defintion more than one data section - provide a real world use case example related to this
17:58:25 [Sreed]
Asir: I want to have logical reason for the change
18:06:24 [Bob]
ack wu
18:07:14 [Sreed]
Wu: Implementation perspective I don't see much conflict
18:11:25 [Bob]
preferred way is to use the multiple mex element approach.
18:11:56 [Sreed]
Bob: Issue no 8205 resolved as proposed with the ammendedment - preferred way is to use the multiple mex element approach
18:11:59 [asir]
when there are multiple mex:Metadata elements are involved
18:12:09 [Zakim]
18:12:15 [Zakim]
18:17:35 [Wu]
In addition to doug's proposal, the added text can be "It may also embed as multiple metadata as separate metadata sections under one metadata element"
18:17:56 [Wu]
s/as/ /
18:18:40 [Wu]
"It may also embed multiple metadata as separate metadata sections under one metadata element"
18:18:43 [Zakim]
18:25:25 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 8290
18:25:53 [Bob]
RESOLUTION: 8205 resolved as proposed plus additional recommendation text
18:25:59 [Sreed]
18:26:48 [Ram]
18:26:52 [dug]
18:27:19 [Bob]
ack dug
18:28:29 [dug]
to the end of bullet #2: , or an HTTP reachable resource.
18:30:11 [Sreed]
Bob: Resolved issue 8290
18:30:34 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 8292
18:30:45 [Sreed]
18:30:49 [Ram]
18:31:17 [Zakim]
18:31:38 [Sreed]
Bob: Any discussion
18:32:41 [Ram]
18:33:25 [MartinC]
MartinC has joined #ws-ra
18:34:34 [Sreed]
Ram: accepting the proposal retaining the sentense that was removed
18:36:01 [Bob]
resolved as amended
18:36:09 [Sreed]
Bob: Resolved 8292
18:36:22 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 8294
18:36:35 [Sreed]
18:37:01 [Ram]
Ram's comment:
18:37:17 [Sreed]
Ram: comment above
18:38:34 [Sreed]
Bob: Any objection
18:39:15 [Sreed]
Bob: Issue 8294 resolved with Ram comment
18:39:28 [Zakim]
18:40:11 [Bob]
Topic: 8180, 8299, 8302
18:40:37 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
18:40:43 [gpilz]
18:41:09 [Bob]
ack li
18:41:45 [Sreed]
Bob: any discussion on combined proposal as posted by Gil?
18:46:54 [MartinC]
MartinC has left #ws-ra
18:46:58 [MartinC]
MartinC has joined #ws-ra
18:47:10 [Sreed]
gpliz: Resource Manager/Server - intro section discusses related to operations - 3 use cases - added a new paragraph, info as in the above doc
18:48:31 [Sreed]
Ram: Send me a request to create a resource & update a request, is there are any expectation - clarification question
18:49:47 [Sreed]
gpliz: Next change adding the representation element - nothing in it
18:50:08 [Sreed]
Ram: what are the differenent representations
18:50:23 [Sreed]
gpliz: As discussed in the doc
18:57:23 [Sreed]
Bob: Any discussions
19:04:53 [Sreed]
Ram: Discussed in the message - what is null really mean. 3 Cases have been disucssed
19:06:11 [Sreed]
Ram: Non-empty representation, Empty-representation matches with gpliz proposal
19:07:16 [Sreed]
Ram: Null representation assuming resources does not exsist - how the behavior effected
19:08:24 [Sreed]
gpliz: In the proposal it address the create - null or non existent
19:10:11 [Sreed]
gpliz: Resource associated to null constructor
19:10:50 [Sreed]
gpliz: Default constructor creating resource with no representation - return empty
19:11:59 [Sreed]
Ram: reffering to doc - last column Null representation assuming resource exists default form (assumption)
19:13:17 [Sreed]
Ram: How do we express the resource which is in default form in XML
19:22:30 [Bob]
s/Jan 26/Jan 19
19:25:34 [Sreed]
Bob: XML resource has representation
19:31:52 [DaveS]
19:39:55 [Sreed]
Bob: Gill's proposal few areas need to be modified or clarified
19:49:37 [fmaciel]
fmaciel has joined #ws-ra
19:57:32 [Zakim]
19:57:35 [Zakim]
19:57:50 [Zakim]
20:00:10 [fmaciel]
fmaciel has left #ws-ra
20:08:38 [Zakim]
20:08:39 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA(F2F)11:00AM has ended
20:08:40 [Zakim]
Attendees were asoldano, [Fujitsu], Tom_Rutt, MartinC, [IPcaller], Gilbert_Pilz, J.Mischkinsky, Li
21:00:12 [Bob]
we resume
21:00:56 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 6435
21:02:00 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ws-ra
21:02:05 [Sreed]
21:03:50 [DaveS]
DaveS has joined #ws-ra
21:04:48 [MartinC]
zakim, who is on the call?
21:06:10 [MartinC]
RRSAgent, invite zakim
21:06:10 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'invite zakim', MartinC. Try /msg RRSAgent help
21:06:18 [Sreed]
gpliz: Send renew request, expiration time goes off - pending expiration - end renew response, service the description (active)
21:07:26 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-ra
21:07:28 [Sreed]
Bob: State table of Subscription/Event state table
21:08:10 [MartinC]
Zakim, who is on the call?
21:08:10 [Zakim]
sorry, MartinC, I don't know what conference this is
21:08:11 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DaveS, MartinC, gpilz, asir, li, Tom_Rutt, Bob, Ram, RRSAgent, Sreed, dug, trackbot, Yves
21:08:56 [Sreed]
Bob: Subscription expires during the renew - inconsistent state of the subscription - renew occurs
21:09:37 [Sreed]
gpilz: this is distributed computing all the entire subscription/event will have several states
21:09:42 [MartinC]
Zakim, this is WS_WSRA(F2F)
21:09:42 [Zakim]
ok, MartinC; that matches WS_WSRA(F2F)11:00AM
21:10:01 [MartinC]
zakim, who is on the call?
21:10:01 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MartinC (muted), Li, [Fujitsu]
21:10:21 [Sreed]
Bob: State to change is timeout other is renew, if renew happens it cant timeout - state of the object
21:13:30 [Zakim]
21:14:43 [li]
21:19:42 [Bob]
ack li
21:21:05 [dug]
21:21:44 [dug]
21:21:45 [Sreed]
li: I agree with gpilz point - state of the subscription (data structure represents the subscription)
21:22:19 [Ram]
21:22:54 [Sreed]
dug: two diff subscription objects but they are separate objects - going with Li direction these dont have the coorelation services v/s client
21:26:46 [Sreed]
Bob: Li can discuss on your second point
21:28:08 [gpilz]
21:31:04 [Sreed]
Bob: we have series of operations - respone might be message or state change,but one side is the state of subscription , it is not state sharing protocol - stable protocol which could specify known state
21:31:33 [Sreed]
Li: very good suggestion
21:32:55 [li]
21:34:06 [Wu]
Wu has joined #ws-ra
21:39:10 [Sreed]
Bob: Pointng to event source subscription table - subscribe request if not active create, for a diff response to state
21:41:27 [Sreed]
Bob: dug's observation subscription before exisits doesnt exist, is the state of non-existent - no distinction one time existed
21:43:19 [gpilz]
21:43:35 [Sreed]
dug:state table about an event source - one row - subscription state table doesnt have subscribe request row
21:44:02 [Sreed]
Bob: Issue getting lifecycle - subscription manager job
21:46:09 [Wu]
There is no distinction in terms of the state that a non-existent subscription, and a non-existent subscription but one time existed (e.g. before expired)
21:50:02 [Tom_Rutt]
21:52:57 [Tom_Rutt]
can anyone clarify why it is bad to separate the state tables, one for each processing entity subject to conformance, Why combine two into one table?
21:53:16 [Tom_Rutt]
answer, It is an editorial convenience, since one of the tables is so trivial
22:03:23 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
22:12:21 [Tom_Rutt]
22:13:04 [Bob]
ack tom
22:14:02 [Sreed]
Tom Rutt: will it be a maintenance issue related to this proposal
22:15:04 [Tom_Rutt]
Is the benefit of the state tables being present to help the reader, worth the effort to maintain the spec over time as changes are made to the text
22:15:45 [Wu]
22:15:56 [asir]
22:16:12 [Sreed]
Ram: fine with the direction the challenge - from implementation perspective the developers might feel different
22:16:32 [Bob]
ack ram
22:16:37 [Bob]
ack gp
22:16:41 [Bob]
ack wu
22:17:07 [Sreed]
Wu: I second ram's comments & also second Bob's comment, this is part of the spec & we need to maintain
22:17:42 [MartinC]
+1 to bob
22:19:55 [Zakim]
22:20:13 [MartinC]
MartinC has left #ws-ra
22:22:01 [Sreed]
Bob: Continue working on state tables - to be completed
22:29:52 [dug]
22:30:32 [Wu]
State table is informative and we can decide at LC, since it does not add any additional semantics.
22:31:45 [Bob]
ack asir
22:31:51 [Bob]
ack dug
22:32:25 [li]
22:33:23 [gpilz]
22:33:31 [Bob]
ack li
22:33:34 [Bob]
ack gp
22:37:38 [Sreed]
Bob: we should continue on disucssions
22:39:23 [Sreed]
Bob: Choices - we can accept the draft or required changes to it or defer for now & discuss it later
22:39:46 [Sreed]
Bob: related to state table is anything wrong
22:44:41 [Sreed]
Bob: related to proposal will be deffered for discussion till tomorrow & issues can open on this if any
22:46:54 [Zakim]
22:58:34 [Zakim]
23:00:02 [Zakim]
23:00:39 [li]
23:00:45 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 7986
23:00:46 [dug]
23:06:22 [asir]
23:06:51 [Sreed]
dug: policy alternative - superset messages
23:08:00 [Sreed]
gpilz: Subscription - notification WSDL & other set of subscribers provide different choice - is this possible in the proposal
23:11:03 [Wu]
23:11:49 [Bob]
ack asir
23:11:58 [asir]
i have another point to make as well
23:13:46 [Sreed]
Asir: set of policies - a policy has no of alternatives
23:16:27 [Bob]
ack wu
23:16:42 [Sreed]
Wu: I agree with Asir & gpilz comments
23:17:26 [asir]
23:17:28 [Sreed]
Bob: Last sentence removed in the proposal any objects
23:18:03 [Bob]
ack asir
23:25:33 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #ws-ra
23:25:40 [dug]
When present, this OPTIONAL parameter includes the Endpoint Subject Policy that the event source supports for sending notifications. This element MUST have one child element - typically a wsp:Policy element or a wsp:PolicyReference element. A subscriber can use this information to discover the valid set of alternatives that MAY be used within a wse:NotifyTo EPR which will be used for any...
23:25:41 [dug]
...Notification message sent from the event source to the event sink. If the event source advertises Notification WSDL then any Policy associated with those WSDLs SHOULD be consistent with the alternatives in this parameter.
23:27:38 [Sreed]
asir: what it means by consistent
23:28:48 [Sreed]
asir: how do you enforce the policy & can drop the last sentence
23:28:59 [Wu]
How about "Any policy expressions included within this parameter SHOULD be consistent with those policy expression alternatives s of the Notification WSDL that the event source advertise."
23:32:08 [dug]
When present, this OPTIONAL parameter includes the Endpoint Subject Policy that the event source supports for sending notifications. This element MUST have one child element - typically a wsp:Policy element or a wsp:PolicyReference element. A subscriber can use this information to discover the valid set of Policy Alternatives that MAY be used within a wse:NotifyTo EPR which will be used for...
23:32:10 [dug]
...any Notification message sent from the event source to the event sink. Any policy alternatives included within this parameter SHOULD be compatible with those policy alternatives available of the Notification WSDLs that the event source advertises.
23:32:11 [Sreed]
Bob: we should be able to fix this
23:33:17 [Sreed]
Bob: Any objection to the new text ammended to the proposal
23:34:02 [asir]
s/policy alternatives/Policy Alternatives/g
23:34:27 [Sreed]
Bob: Any objection
23:35:08 [Sreed]
RESOLVED: 7986 as described above
23:35:19 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 7791
23:35:53 [Bob]
proposal at
23:37:26 [dug]
23:38:57 [Sreed]
asir: optional policy assertion parameter defined as mentioned in proposal
23:39:27 [Bob]
ack dug
23:40:30 [asir]
23:40:57 [Sreed]
dug: policy is one many possibe things future client talking to future resource - it should resource metadata minimum include WSDL what operations & attached - abstract them more to metadata
23:41:24 [Sreed]
asir: I need to know the policy - transfer resource perspective
23:41:33 [Bob]
ack asir
23:41:50 [Sreed]
dug: limited view current use case care about - what about the specific metadata
23:43:08 [dug]
23:43:22 [Sreed]
DaveS: if the factory is resource is the MEX metadata associated - in the factory metedata find WSDL it comes back - deployment strategy
23:44:17 [Sreed]
asir: talking to resource factory - will it give metadata giving about the children
23:46:50 [asir]
23:48:58 [Bob]
ack dug
23:49:55 [asir]
23:51:38 [Bob]
ack asir
23:52:30 [Sreed]
asir: as discussed yesterday related to event source policy assertion WSDL of the event source for all the notification messages WSDL can carry policy & the metadata
23:55:01 [Sreed]
Bob: Any objection to proposal
23:56:03 [Sreed]
dug: Doesnt accept the current proposal
23:57:36 [dug]
if we adopt this direction then we need to extend it
00:12:31 [dug]
q+ 8191
00:14:18 [Sreed]
ACTION: Bob to responed to issue submitter
00:14:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-143 - Responed to issue submitter [on Bob Natale - due 2010-02-04].
00:15:07 [dug]
00:15:08 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 8191
00:15:10 [dug]
00:18:46 [dug]
In the event that there is more than one node which would match the XPath, the implementation MUST select or return the first node only.
00:19:00 [Ram]
00:19:41 [Bob]
ack 8191
00:19:59 [jeffm]
jeffm has joined #ws-ra
00:20:20 [Bob]
ack ram
00:21:15 [Tom_Rutt]
I cannot hear ram now
00:24:05 [Sreed]
Ashok: Support you are doing put - XPATH selects 5 nodes
00:24:43 [Ashok]
00:27:06 [Sreed]
Ram: providing expression language XPath 1.0 - check to see we use Xpath on using multiple nodes
00:28:04 [Sreed]
Ram: we are taking away some flexibility in XPath
00:28:25 [Tom_Rutt]
00:29:00 [Bob]
ack tom
00:31:28 [Sreed]
Bob: Need some more time on this?
00:32:16 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 8196
00:33:19 [Sreed]
TOPIC: 8229
00:33:33 [dug]
Topic: 8196
00:37:18 [Tom_Rutt]
00:40:09 [Ram]
00:41:40 [DaveS]
00:41:43 [Bob]
ack tom
00:43:21 [Sreed]
Tom_Rutt: I dont understand about this proposal - prefix mapping anybody using XPath these prefix are namespaces, I like the way done in CMDBf
00:44:32 [Sreed]
gpilz: XPath 1.0 specify local name possible call out text value
00:44:32 [asir]
00:45:54 [Bob]
ack ram
00:47:11 [Bob]
ack dave
00:49:48 [Ram]
00:50:47 [Sreed]
dug: explain related to late binding
00:52:36 [Sreed]
Ram: no transformation been produced been consumed, there is transformed in the middle transforms or needs to do
00:52:43 [Bob]
ack asir
00:53:26 [gpilz]
00:53:32 [Tom_Rutt]
00:54:40 [Sreed]
asir: I am not fully convinced with this problem talking about XPath there are no. of usage which are succesful XML Query, XML Schema - take care of the mapping of prefix. We have good support SOAP 1.2 it clearly identifies elements must statement be preserved
00:54:48 [Bob]
ack ram
00:54:55 [Bob]
ack gpi
00:55:00 [Bob]
ack tom
00:55:16 [Sreed]
gpilz: Other specs are broken that needs out spec is broken
00:56:06 [Tom_Rutt]
the problem is this: the filter writer wants to write constraints which require the use of namespaces,
00:56:36 [asir]
00:57:22 [Bob]
ack yve
00:57:43 [Tom_Rutt]
the filter writer does not know what prefixes are going to be used in what is being filtered on
00:58:25 [gpilz]
here's a link to a (slightly incorrect) example of using namespace-uri():
00:58:30 [gpilz]
00:59:14 [Tom_Rutt]
00:59:39 [Bob]
ack asir
00:59:45 [Bob]
ack gpi
01:00:11 [Tom_Rutt]
xpath was designed to work with both xquery and xslt, each of these has a different way to resolve namespace prefix mappings
01:00:39 [Tom_Rutt]
so xpath has no way to resolve namespace prefixes on its own
01:02:24 [Bob]
ack tom
01:03:02 [gpilz]
01:03:03 [gpilz]
01:03:03 [gpilz]
01:03:04 [gpilz]
01:04:30 [DaveS]
HHHH /a\[namespace-uri()='']/b\[namespace-uri()='']
01:04:35 [gpilz]
<wsf:Expression Language=""> /a\[namespace-uri()='">']/b\[namespace-uri()=''] </wsf:Expression>
01:04:42 [Yves]
01:05:36 [Ram]
01:07:28 [Bob]
ack ram
01:08:35 [Tom_Rutt]
what about eventing filters
01:09:25 [DaveS]
Gil is doing a proposal that address three spec. Enum, Eventing, and Frag
01:10:16 [Zakim]
01:10:22 [Zakim]
01:10:24 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA(F2F)11:00AM has ended
01:10:26 [Zakim]
Attendees were MartinC, Li, [Fujitsu], Tom_Rutt
01:13:27 [Bob]
rrsagent, generate minutes
01:13:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Bob
01:27:41 [gpilz]
gpilz has left #ws-ra