1. Roll call. Scribe for minutes selected from attached list. Actions to be
recorded on IRC. (11.00PT + 5)
- AT&T Mark Jones
- Canon Herve Ruellan
- DaimlerChrysler R. & Tech Mario Jeckle
- IBM David Fallside
- IBM Noah Mendelsohn
- IBM John Ibbotson
- Microsoft Corporation Martin Gudgin
- Microsoft Corporation Jeff Schlimmer
- Oracle Anish Karmarkar (scribe)
- Progress Software Colleen Evans
- SAP AG Volker Wiechers
- SeeBeyond Pete Wenzel
- Software AG Michael Champion
- Sun Microsystems Marc Hadley
- Systinet Jacek Kopecky
- W3C Carine Bournez
- W3C Yves Lafon
- AT&T Michah Lerner
- Canon Jean-Jacques Moreau
- DaimlerChrysler R. & Tech Andreas Riegg
- Oracle Jeff Mischkinsky
- Progress Software David Chappell
- Software AG Dietmar Gaertner
- Systinet (IDOOX) Miroslav Simek
- BEA Systems David Orchard
- Ericsson Nilo Mitra
- Fujitsu Limited Masahiko Narita
- Fujitsu Limited Kazunori Iwasa
- IONA Technologies Oisin Hurley
- SAP AG Gerd Hoelzing
- Unisys Lynne Thompson
- BEA Systems Mark Nottingham
- IONA Technologies Eric Newcomer
- Macromedia Glen Daniels
- Matsushita Electric Ryuji Inoue
- Tibco Don Mullen
- Unisys Nick Smilonich
2. Agenda review, and AOB (11.05 + 5)
3. Approval of Jan 15 and Feb 11 telcon minutes (11.10 + 5)
Jean-Jacques M was accidentally omitted from the CR telecon minutes. That
will be fixed by Carine/Yves.
11 February minutes approved without objection.
4. Review action items, see
[http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/Admin/#pending] (11.15 + 10)
Pending action items 2002/11/20: Yves, DavidF Get confirmation from DIME &
SOAPwA authors that we can reuse the spec
Yves had nothing new to report.
DavidF said that IBM should be sending confirmation very soon.
Gudge/JeffS stated that Microsoft has started to get the wording together.
DavidF to follow up on this with David Turner from Microsoft.
2003/01/15: Editors Incorporate new copyrights in the yet-unpublished
Nilo to do this by end of this week (as per his email).
2003/01/22: Carine, Yves and David Setup registration & draft agenda for
f2f mtg @ plenary
2003/01/29: Colleen to provide intro QA doc feedback (march 14)
An email was sent out today.
2003/01/29: DavidF Write back to SQL/XML about us making the change (wrt
402) and ask for implementation status
DavidF contacted Jim Melton. SQL/XML group is happy that we did this.
ISO SQL group has also accepted this change. This change is now part of an
ISO spec. Jim does not know the implementation status of new algorithm.
All the developers that he (Jim) did speak to (Oracle/IBM/MS and others)
are happy with this change.
Treat remaining content of Issues 405-408 as editorial at their discretion
and to respond to Susan on the resolution.
Respond to RDF Core re: review of their spec vis-a-vis LC29 (feb 15)
Jacek sent out a response to the WG mailing list, but does not know where
send it. Jacek's response is at -
DavidF to forward this feedback to the appropriate place.
Nilo will have Part 0 changes reflecting Susan Lesch's comments by Feb 21
MarcH to ping Nilo on issue 410
Contact Anish ASAP to determine status of test collection.
Contact Joseph Reagle wrt Mime registration process in IETF by (feb 19)
Joseph responded with a URL -
This URL has six steps. Some of this has been already done.
Yves to register the media type.
2003/01/05: n11n editors, W3C staff Publish n11n as a note.
Yves stated that this was in the process. He is waiting for W3C to say
it is ok. He hoped that this would be done next week.
2003/01/05: DavidF & W3C staff
Publish AM WD.
Yves stated that this should be published tomorrow.
Revise relay rules to say: " All namespace information items in the
[in-scope namespaces] MUST be preserved. Additional namespace information
items MAY be added."
Add a note to clarify that NS prefixes must be preserved (as a result of
Delete this action. This action is a duplicate of the one above.
Respond to commentator on issue 411 and to xmlp-comments
Check with internal implementers vis-a-vis participating in the feature
MarcH mentioned that very small progress has been been. He also
mentioned that a meeting has been arranged.
try to pursue any avenues to get more evidence for the REST-related
DavidF stated that we have two implementations of these features: White
and another implementation. These implementations have implemented
MEP and GET method in HTTP binding. We have interop traces for those in
one-direction. It is expected that it will take a week to obtain a second
Draft an email to the TAG about the issues around HTTP GET binding
DavidF mentioned that this was not done, as we do have evidence on HTTP
GET binding implementation. Action to be dropped.
Go to CG to say that we are working on the Attachment Feature reqs and that
believe there will be interaction with WSDL and we are mindful of that but
won't do any design work; we think WSDL group should take it on board to
5. Status reports (11.25 + 10)
-- Parts 0, 1, 2
Nothing to report on part 0.
Part 1&2, mostly done, except for a very minor issues.
Marc: We do need to close 412.
DavidF: I believe we did close that, we neglected to send an email to
Gudge: Yes, it was done.
Gudge to send email to DavidF and xmlp-comments.
-- Test Collection
AnishK: an email was sent out last week which had a TODO list for the
test collection. Working on incorporating xmlp-* tests and reorganizing
the SOAPBuilders tests in a different section. A mapping of LC assertion
numbers to new immutable assertion numbers was sent to DavidF. Still more
comfortable with the 24th deadline rather than the 21st deadline.
DavidF: About half way done updating the implementation table to link to
the assertions in the TC doc. This will allow someone to click on a
particular feature in the implementation summary table and get to the
assertions in the test collection document.
-- (AF Requirements WD)
MarkJ: made an initial stab at tweaking the ascii text and putting it
into HTML format. This was emailed to Yves. Looking for guidance from Yves
on pub rules. The document will be available for the next F2F.
DavidF: To clarify - MarkJ is doing the legwork to get the document
ready in the format that WD needs. This doc will be used at F2F. This is
not a WD.
DavidF: can you put in the doc text that say that this is not a WD. So
if people come across it accidentally, they will not be misled.
MarkJ: where should the document be made available so that members can
get to it.
DavidF: either email or member accessible page only. But we will not
MarkJ: I will work with Yves to get this done.
MarkJ: there is still one requirement that the AFTF did not discuss.
This has to be done either at a telecon or at the F2F.
DavidF: can the AFTF have one more meeting before the F2F?
MarkJ: I will setup a meeting. Probably for friday. Will wait to see if
friday will work for everyone.
MarkJ: note also the doc does not represent consensus or agreement amongst
AFTF. But it is something that the AFTF agreed to bring to the WG.
-- Registration of "application/soap+xml" media type, see
Already discussed, during the AI review.
-- n11n and Abstract Model publications
Already discussed, during the AI review.
Yves: nothing new to report.
-- f2f meeting
DavidF: I don't have anything to add.
Noah: we are providing the list of attendees to the security folks. So
if you neglected to register, then do so. Projector and phone available.
DavidF: draft agenda will be made available this week.
6. CR progress and issues,
http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-cr-issues.html (11.35 + 5)
-- CR implementation report
DavidF: not much to say. Big news is the REST related features are being
implemented. The impl. page has a lot of 'yellow' (waiting for one
more trace). SOAPBuilders meeting is next week. The hope is that after the
meeting more feature will turn 'green'.
-- we agreed previously to close #402 "SQL/XML changing Unicode
escape sequence algorithm" by changing our spec to conform to the SQL/XML
group's latest version. We did not decide whether or not to add an
implementation test for this algorithm, in part so we could determine
implementation status. We will review this status and may decide whether or
not to add a test.
DavidF: the WG previously we decided to leave this to the implementers. The
implementers have one more telecon next tuesday. This will be discussed
there. Unless anyone has a objection, this question will be put to the
implementers at the telecon.
-- pushback on any issues closed?
7. Attachment Feature Implementation Spec (11.40 + 5)
Spec is at http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/07/SOAP-AF/aftf-soap-af.html
-- status of AFTF work
MarkJ: no update.