IRC log of ws-ra on 2011-03-01

Timestamps are in UTC.

20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
logging to
20:30:20 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
20:30:20 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-ra
20:30:22 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
20:30:22 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM already started
20:30:23 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
20:30:23 [trackbot]
Date: 01 March 2011
20:30:40 [Zakim]
20:31:05 [Katy]
Katy has joined #ws-ra
20:31:16 [Zakim]
20:31:55 [Zakim]
+ +44.196.281.aaaa
20:32:17 [Zakim]
20:32:32 [Ram]
Ram has joined #ws-ra
20:32:33 [Zakim]
20:34:26 [Zakim]
20:34:50 [BobF]
20:35:26 [trutt]
trutt has joined #ws-ra
20:35:27 [Katy]
Topic: Appoval of Agenda
20:35:36 [dug]
scribe: Katy
20:36:35 [Katy]
Bob: Goal for CR vote 15th March
20:36:58 [Katy]
Topic: Approval of minutes of F2F
20:37:08 [Katy]
Resolution: Minutes approved
20:37:24 [dug]
bots are sleep today
20:37:35 [dug]
20:37:44 [Katy]
20:38:35 [asoldano]
20:38:42 [Katy]
Bob: Any objection to accepting proposal in comment no 1 of proposal.
20:39:57 [Katy]
Doug: Describes proposal
20:41:38 [Katy]
Gil: Feel uneasy about this because assigning semantic meaning to the empty string
20:42:43 [Katy]
... How about only making the Get the special case
20:43:01 [Katy]
Doug: What if someone wants to use the empty string as id value
20:43:13 [Katy]
Gil: That's associating special value to ""
20:43:34 [li]
li has joined #ws-ra
20:43:40 [Katy]
... we could have special string that means "unidentified" and special case that
20:44:00 [Katy]
... within the W3C namespace
20:44:49 [trutt]
20:44:57 [Katy]
Doug: I don't think this is special semantics as it's indicated no identifier
20:45:00 [BobF]
act tom
20:45:05 [BobF]
ack tr
20:45:07 [Katy]
Bob: Empty string might mean no value
20:46:17 [Katy]
Tom: What if there's an overloaded identifier that happens to be ""?
20:47:15 [Katy]
Gil: The point is a symbol to identify no useful Id - whether it's a "" or special URI
20:48:44 [Katy]
Doug: Initial problem was that the client doesn't know whether it needs an identifier or not.
20:49:14 [Katy]
Gil: So when types with identifier defined those must be used, I am thinking of types with no identifier
20:49:20 [Katy]
... specified
20:52:46 [Katy]
Gil: Problem is we don't know all the dialects there may be some types where we don't have an identifier. We should have a way to put these things without an identifier if people choose not to - but it's their problem
20:52:55 [Katy]
Doug: But that kills interop
20:52:59 [trutt]
20:53:04 [dug]
20:53:12 [Katy]
Gil: disagree
20:53:18 [BobF]
ack tr
20:53:35 [Katy]
Tom: In what scenario would someone not have an id for their metadata section?
20:53:57 [BobF]
ack d
20:55:13 [Katy]
Doug: If you know enough about the metadata to 'put' it, you must put the appropriate identifier. If it's optional then the clients always need to ask for everything
20:55:44 [Katy]
... either mandate the use of identifier or there's no point in it.
20:56:17 [trutt]
20:56:27 [BobF]
ack t
20:56:57 [Katy]
20:57:18 [BobF]
ack k
20:58:05 [trutt]
If you require an id, but allow it to be "", it will all work
20:58:51 [Katy]
Katy: Id should not be optional or clients would have to assume it's not there
20:58:55 [BobF]
that means that the set of values for the id attribute is empty
20:59:58 [Katy]
Bob: Empty identifier means set of values is empty/not present (in terms of XSLT test)
21:00:01 [trutt]
"" is a value, it will test for presence
21:00:25 [Dave]
Dave has joined #ws-ra
21:00:45 [Yves]
optimization or not, absent and null value must be described
21:01:13 [dug]
21:01:15 [Dave]
Dave Snelling is lurking on tthe IRC only.
21:01:24 [trutt]
"" is not a null value, it is a valid string "empty string" , not null
21:01:38 [BobF]
zakim, I would like to report a lurker
21:01:38 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'I would like to report a lurker', BobF
21:02:27 [trutt]
if you test for presence of the value with "", it will be true in xpath. To test for "" you have to actually do a sting compare operation with "" as the compared value
21:02:37 [Katy]
Gil: We define enumerated set of dialects we know about. What we are discussing is, amongst those dialects, can you leave off the identifier? I agree with Doug that we can't allow folk to leave the Id off for the cases where the dialects/ids are defined.
21:02:57 [BobF]
ack d
21:03:56 [gpilz]
gpilz has joined #ws-ra
21:04:21 [trutt]
21:04:35 [BobF]
Java will return an empty string if there is no value defined
21:04:40 [BobF]
ack tr
21:04:49 [Katy]
Doug: To ease confusion factor, I would like to require the identifier to be set (to "" or syntax string) else folk will think that absence = wildcard.
21:05:51 [gpilz]
21:06:14 [BobF]
ack gp
21:06:30 [Katy]
Tom: Schema point, technically speaking a default would work but it would cause more problems to have a default than to use "" - the latter makes it easier for xpath
21:07:18 [Katy]
Gil: I think we have agreed the following 1) Put needs the type; 2) in some cases value of the type is default which=""
21:07:49 [Katy]
... we need to say whether it is legal to put empty string for a dialect that mex provides an identifier to
21:07:54 [trutt]
21:08:06 [Katy]
Doug: I agree, I think we have come full circle back to the proposal
21:08:44 [BobF]
ack tr
21:08:52 [dug]
<a foo='1'/> @foo != @foo2
21:09:02 [dug]
oops, <a foo''/>
21:09:20 [dug]
according to xml spy anyway
21:09:22 [gpilz]
- make @Identifier a required attribute of mex:MetadataSection - if a metadata type does not have any useful data to use as the @Identifier value then it MUST use "" for the value - keep @Identifier optional on the mex:GetMetadata operation - mex:GetMetadata w/o @Identifier (not "") means match ALL @Identifiers
21:09:24 [gpilz]
21:09:28 [trutt]
21:10:19 [BobF]
ack tr
21:10:46 [gpilz]
- make @Identifier a required attribute of mex:MetadataSection
21:10:46 [gpilz]
- you MAY use "" as the value of @Identifier except for those Dialects defined by WS-MEX
21:10:46 [gpilz]
- keep @Identifier optional on the mex:GetMetadata operation
21:10:46 [gpilz]
- mex:GetMetadata w/o @Identifier (not "") means match ALL @Identifiers
21:11:09 [BobF]
21:11:11 [dug]
21:11:37 [BobF]
ack dug
21:12:15 [wuchou]
wuchou has joined #ws-ra
21:12:24 [Katy]
Doug: I will work on this text before the next meeting when we can review
21:12:56 [Katy]
Bob: Do we agree directionally so Bob can work on final text
21:13:26 [Katy]
Action: Doug to write up text based on comment one with some changes to 2nd bullet
21:13:26 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-177 - Write up text based on comment one with some changes to 2nd bullet [on Doug Davis - due 2011-03-08].
21:14:05 [Ram]
21:14:24 [Katy]
21:14:38 [BobF]
ack ram
21:14:44 [Katy]
Ram: Currently collecting feedback, will have information in the next few days
21:15:09 [Katy]
... Wait until next call prior to confirming final answer
21:15:17 [Katy]
Bob: Defer to the next call
21:15:53 [dug]
21:15:59 [Katy]
21:16:21 [Ram]
21:16:44 [BobF]
ack ram
21:17:24 [Katy]
Ram: No further testing required?
21:18:19 [Ram]
21:18:40 [BobF]
ack ram
21:18:43 [Katy]
Bob: We will be producing new specs so we should crank through all the tests again
21:19:17 [Katy]
Ram: Previous mex issue need aditional testing?
21:19:51 [Katy]
Doug: Difficult to answer because the issue is clarifying the semantics
21:20:03 [Katy]
... so to some may be no change
21:20:28 [Katy]
Ram: Recommend that we don't do unecessary testing as it has big resource issues
21:21:18 [gpilz]
21:21:37 [Yves]
we definitely have to test it, but that's what CR is all about
21:21:41 [Katy]
Bob: I would prefer to be conservative in our testing, even if just syntax change
21:21:54 [dug]
21:22:05 [Katy]
Yves: Any changes to element needs to be re-tested if after CR
21:22:12 [BobF]
ack gp
21:24:40 [BobF]
ack dug
21:25:57 [Katy]
Bob: If we change the spec, we should retest. Now we have gone through the process once, it should be easier
21:26:10 [Katy]
... consider this when accepting the proposals
21:26:53 [Katy]
... we could defer 11776 so we can decide whether the test impact too big
21:27:45 [dug]
21:27:48 [Katy]
Topic: Misc issues
21:28:14 [Katy]
Bob: need to apply for the MIME type.
21:28:22 [Katy]
... done in link above
21:28:23 [trutt]
given example xml doc
21:28:25 [trutt]
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
21:28:27 [trutt]
21:28:29 [trutt]
<element atr1=""> "" </element>
21:28:30 [trutt]
21:28:31 [trutt]
The following xpath returns the element:
21:28:33 [trutt]
21:28:34 [trutt]
the following xpath does not return the element (no match) //element[@atr1=" "]
21:28:36 [trutt]
Thus the "" is not comparable with " "
21:28:52 [Katy]
Topic: Items at risk
21:30:03 [Katy]
Bob: Items at risk are no longer at risk as we have adequate implementations for WS-Eventing and WS-Enum
21:30:28 [trutt]
21:31:04 [BobF]
ack tr
21:31:35 [Zakim]
21:31:50 [trutt]
I just lost my connection , is the meeting over?
21:32:00 [Ram]
not yet
21:32:06 [Ram]
We are talking about next meeting.
21:32:07 [BobF]
talking about next meeting
21:32:24 [Katy]
Topic: Next week's meeting
21:33:00 [dug]
21:33:07 [BobF]
ack dug
21:33:08 [Katy]
Bob: Clash with cloud management meeting on 8th so we will have next meeting on the 15th and meeting on 22nd
21:33:14 [Zakim]
21:33:34 [Ram]
WS-Enumeration test coverage analysis to be completed by Microsoft.
21:33:40 [gpilz]
21:33:45 [dug]
q+ gil
21:33:55 [dug]
q- \
21:34:42 [li]
is Darth Vadar speaking as well?
21:34:49 [dug]
zakim, who is making noise?
21:35:00 [Zakim]
dug, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Bob_Freund (25%), Gilbert_Pilz (41%)
21:35:32 [dug]
21:35:46 [Ram]
Test coverage analysis actions:
21:35:48 [Ram]
WS-Enumeration test coverage analysis to be completed by Microsoft.
21:35:56 [Ram]
WS-Eventing test coverage analysis to be analysis by Avaya.
21:36:02 [Ram]
WS-Transfer/WS-Fragment test coverage analysis to be analysis by IBM.
21:36:04 [BobF]
ack du
21:36:08 [Ram]
WS-MEX test coverage analysis to be analysis by Oracle.
21:36:13 [BobF]
ack g
21:36:46 [Katy]
Gil: Why aren't faults defined in the WSDL in the W3C specs?
21:39:05 [Katy]
Tom: If SOAP faults they can happen anywhere so don't need to be defined in the WSDL
21:40:52 [dug]
answer: we're lazy
21:40:59 [dug]
answer: 'cause
21:41:11 [dug]
answer: go away, use REST
21:41:30 [BobF]
just log them
21:43:43 [dug]
would we need a union to express multiple faults could be returned?
21:43:52 [Katy]
Gil: will look into this and decide whether issue or not next meeting
21:43:53 [Zakim]
21:43:55 [Zakim]
21:43:55 [Katy]
Katy has left #ws-ra
21:44:02 [Zakim]
21:44:04 [Zakim]
21:44:05 [Zakim]
21:44:06 [Zakim]
- +44.196.281.aaaa
21:44:07 [Zakim]
21:44:12 [Zakim]
21:44:13 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
21:44:14 [Zakim]
Attendees were Bob_Freund, Doug_Davis, Gilbert_Pilz, Wu_Chou, [Microsoft], +44.196.281.aaaa, asoldano, Yves, Tom_Rutt
21:44:16 [BobF]
rrsagent, generate minutes
21:44:16 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate BobF
21:54:05 [gpilz]
gpilz has left #ws-ra
22:39:39 [trutt_]
trutt_ has joined #ws-ra