See also: IRC log
<scribe> Scribe:peaston
<eric> Issue 48 what did we do with it?
<eric> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/48
No objections approving minutes from last week
There is NO meeting next week August 10 2010
Eric should we do a face to face?
Face to face would be useful to capture attention
Phil: what about a virtual face to face
Eric: We should consider it, and the timing e.g. prior to PR?
Re 193 hopeful of provisional registration
Close: Action-196
close action-196
<trackbot> ACTION-196 Apply resolutions for the resolved issues above closed
Topic Raised spec issues:
Resolution: All agree to open issue-55
DIscussing issue-55
Phil: hesitent to remove 2.7.2 perhaps get rid of the key words
<scribe> ACTION: Phil to create an alternate proposal for issue-55 resolution [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/03-soap-jms-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-197 - Create an alternate proposal for issue-55 resolution [on Phil Adams - due 2010-08-10].
Discussing issue-56
Presence of transport attribute in WSDL
phil: what do we lose by not mandating it?
eric: how do interpret other extensions, how do you understand the core binding
phil: tend to have aversion to
lots of transport info other than minimum all you need it the
endpoint address
... implemetations could be smart enough to act on endpoint
only
Resolution: all agree to open issue-56
phil: can we add an untestable assertion
Resolution: all agree to proposed resolution (in issue) for issue-56
discussing issue-57
Resolution: all agree to open
issue-57
... all agree to proposed resolution (in issue) for
issue-57
... all agree to open issue-58
... all agree to proposed resolution (in issue) for
issue-58
issue059 is test case
Resolution: all agree to open
issue-57
... all agree to open issue-59
eric: we should repurpose existing test cases to cover these case
phil: we are not requiring the vendor a means to set correlation id on the request, right?
e.g. we dont expect JAXWS clients to set this
the requirement is a receiving requirement
all agree - no sending node constraints
Resolution: all agree to proposed
resolution (in issue) for issue-58
... all agree to proposed resolution (in issue) for
issue-59
<scribe> ACTION: peaston to update test cases per issue-59 suggestion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/03-soap-jms-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-198 - Update test cases per issue-59 suggestion [on Peter Easton - due 2010-08-10].
<eric> rrsa, make log public
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) Found Scribe: peaston Inferring ScribeNick: peaston Default Present: +1.209.474.aaaa, +1.512.286.aabb, +1.781.280.aacc, eric, padams, peaston Present: +1.209.474.aaaa +1.512.286.aabb +1.781.280.aacc eric padams peaston WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting Got date from IRC log name: 03 Aug 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/08/03-soap-jms-minutes.html People with action items: peaston phil WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]