<trackbot> Date: 11 May 2010

<scribe> scribe: Mark

2) Approval of prior meeting minutes

No objections - the minutes are approved

3) Review the agenda

The agenda is approved as-is

4) Review action items

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/146 - Eric is still waiting for Oracle

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/148 - Mark - need to revise the proposal - will not be a spec change but may require clarification of the FAQ

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/154 - Mark - no complete

<padams> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010May/0004.html

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/160 - Phil - see mail above

Phil: This is complete - involved changing test cases to ensure full coverage of assertions

close action-160

<trackbot> ACTION-160 Implement the test coverage proposals closed

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/161 - Phil

Phil: This was the change to the spec for WSDL precendence - now complete

close action-161

<trackbot> ACTION-161 Re-apply resolution of Issue 31 as per agreed April 13 closed

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/162 - Eric

Eric: Action was to defining new test cases for isFault, but we had a bunch of test cases already that return faults, so this action was completed by modifying the existing tests

close action-162

<trackbot> ACTION-162 Define 2 new test cases for isFault closed

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/163 - Eric

Eric: Action was to approach CXF - mail has been sent, leave open until we get a response

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/164 - Peter

Peter: Progress has a sponsored rep. on the CXF project - would be a better contact for action 163
... actions 164 and 165 are complete

close action-164

<trackbot> ACTION-164 Look at CXF samples and text, and report back to group at how to assess the coverage vs. SOAP/JMS test suite. closed

close action-165

<trackbot> ACTION-165 Look at test suite coverage of existing CXF. closed

5) URI specification:

Eric: Does it make sense to republish as-is under the existing terms (i.e. not under the new terms which transfer IP to the IETF trust)
... If we republish we could start the process to get the RFC approved now

Phil, Mark, Peter, Derek all agree that it makes sense to get the RFC approval process moving again anad to continue to try to get Oracle to approve the new terms in parallel

Eric: Will make the few outstanding updates, republish as a new version of the draft, and then approach the RFC review mailing list again

action Eric to update the URI RFC and republish, then resubmit to IETF review mailing list

<trackbot> Created ACTION-166 - Update the URI RFC and republish, then resubmit to IETF review mailing list [on Eric Johnson - due 2010-05-18].

6) Raised issues:

Issue 27 will be closed when we have republished uRI scheme

8) Accepting applied resolutions:

<padams> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010May/0003.html

<padams> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html?rev=1.83&content-type=text/html&f=h#wsdl-11-properties

Phil: Resolution for issue 31`
... See 3.4.4 and 3.6.1.1

Updated proposal was: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Mar/0024.html

<eric> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html?rev=1.83&content-type=text/html&f=h#isFault

<padams> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Mar/0024.html

<eric> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html?rev=1.81&content-type=text/html&f=h#isFault

Eric: The difference is clearest when viewing spec. versions 1.81 and 1.83 side-by-side (links above)

RESOLUTION: No objections to applying the resolution - Issue 31 can be closed

9) Moving to PR

Eric: Last week we discussed working with CXF to be the vendor neutral reference implementation of the spec. that vendor products could test interoperability against

<eric> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Mar/0024.html

Peter: Latest snapshot of CXF has the SOAP/JMS support. The implementation follows our test cases, but does not have SOAP 1.2 testing
... CXF does not support WSDL 2 but otherwise is quite comprehensive
... Implementation is current up to around Sep 2009

Eric: CXF don't support WSDL 2, are any of us thinking of WSDL 2 support?
... no-one has immediate plans

consensus is that market adoption of WSDL 2 has been smal

there is a danger that we will not get 2 conforming implementatins of WSDL 2

action Eric to talk to Yves about possibility of making WSDL 2.0 section non-normative

<trackbot> Created ACTION-167 - Talk to Yves about possibility of making WSDL 2.0 section non-normative [on Eric Johnson - due 2010-05-18].

AOB

None

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)

No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: mphillip
Found Scribe: Mark

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: Derek Peter Phil Yves aaaa aabb aacc aadd eric joined mphillip1 padams peaston soap-jms trackbot
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Found Date: 11 May 2010
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/05/11-soap-jms-minutes.html
People with action items: