Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 29 June 2010

<Bob> scribenick: Wu

RESOLUTION: June 22 minutes approved

Migration and Primers

Ram: I have doubt to do the migration guide

<Bob> Due to the large number of changes to the submission specs, and since most of the existing implementation seem to have been based on a dmtf version and not of the submitted specifications, a migration guide was thought to be of little or no value

Resolution: no migration guide will be produced (agreed)

<Bob> gil: eventing no schedule as yet, outline by july 20

<Bob> Mex: Katy - not present

wu: will work with Gil on the primer of eventing

Abstracts

<dug> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2010Jun/0012.html

<dug> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2010Jun/0013.html

Bob: short abstract - edits from Doug
... objection abstract?

Ashok: have some concern on MEX

dug: abstracts were from the specs not new creation

<dug> take all current abstracts except for enum - use Dave's enum

Bob: Resolution: agree to use Doug's for all except using Dave's for Enumeration

<dug> done - in cvs

Issue 9609 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9609

<dug> proposal: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/10/06/wsenum-opt.html

Bob: new enumeration behaviour

dug: it does not seem worth to lose create and pull split

tom: we need a fault to the new context

Ram: o.k. to keep create and pull separately. but allow optional extension

Tom: keep creat and pull separate, but to add a policy

dug: prefer not to do any change to keep spec clean

Tom: is this something that WS-Man can do to add this extension?

dug: yes

Bob: Ram suggests we define additional attributes which are optional, to allow initial pull to be done under these options.

dug: Between these two options, I perfer to move towards more to pull

<dug> A-cwna b-Ram's c-Dug's -s/pull/enumerate/

Bob: A, B, or C vote, you can give preference order

Oracle: a, b, c

IBM: a, c

RedHat: c, a

Fujisu: c, a

Avaya: abstain

Microsoft: c, b, a

Bob: c appears as first choice (win)

Tom: may need related policy assertions

dug: I can take that as editor work and checked by you

RESOLUTION: Doug's proposal at http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/10/06/wsenum-opt.html accepted with amendament s/Pull/Enumerate

<dug> add fault for too many items on first pull, add policy to indicate max items on first pull

Bob: no meeting on July 5th

<Tom_Rutt> dug: why not just have the policy be <0 alowed

<dug> <0 ?

Bob: Next meeting is July 20 (July 13 and July 5 meetings are cancelled)
... check mailing list to review changes that Dug will post shortly