See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 23 August 2006
<paulc> Chris: There is an updated agenda !
<paulc> Sorry for its late arrival.
<scribe> scribe:Yakov
<Fabian> My last email to WS-Policy took 3 hrs to get distributed...
<scribe> scribe:Yakov
<paulc> Chris - please note that VER 2 agenda has a slighly different structure.
<cferris> hmmm.... I'm trying to sort out how to deal with that
<maryann> ... is maryann
<maryann> someones at the beach
<bijan> no
<bijan> I'm on skype
<bijan> and muted
Paul: Discussed new agenda
Tony Nadalin: will take notes next week
Monica: scribe on Sept 6
Paul: amend the
minutes with additional people
... Umit pointed out the doc is misleading. It'd be useful to fix
Bijan: was present last week as well
Paul: make changes
<prasad> I was present also
Paul: need to register to F2F
<FrederickHirsch> corrected agenda link: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0137.html
<whenry> Can we list who are registered?
<asir> Here is the link to reg - http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/39293/policyf2f20060912/
Paul: please let chairs know about NOT attending
<whenry> zamkin, unmute me
Paul: perosnal registration page -> result
Prasad: Working
on AI - ongoing
... We have diffmk update from Norm Walsh. Seems to work fine. We have
an AI assigned to W3C staff to integrate diffmk into WS-Policy build
process so that HTML diff version of the specs can generated by
invoking a build target
... Felix will this up
... Converted the "Understanding WS-Policy white paper" to primer in
W3C format and checked in into CVS
... we have a new Non-Normative Appendix in all policy specs called
"Changes in this Version of the Document" that provides a list of
substantive changes since the last Working Draft. This supplements the
Change Log
Paul: questions?
... AI-59 AI-51 - outstanding
Asir: AI-59 AI-51 are done
Paul: Please update the status
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicy/actions/open
<whenry> Is everyone hearing this noise or have I been thrown out?
Paul AI-35 Glen proposed to close it
resolution: mark the AI-35 as done
AI-44
AI-48
Paul: due on Sep 6
AI-59, 51 - were done. Asir will update the status
Paul: continue to review working drafts
resolution: assign to editors
<asir> ACTION: Editors to implement the resolution for issue 3605 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Implement the resolution for issue 3605 [on Editors - due 2006-08-30].
<cferris> RESOLUTION: Issue 3605 closed as editorial and assigned to the editors to apply
Paul: proposes to add empty section and keep the issue open
<scribe> ACTION: Asir to draft proposal [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - Draft proposal [on Asir Vedamuthu - due 2006-08-30].
<cferris> action 2 = Asir to draft proposal for issue 3559
<asir> ACTION: Editors to add empty sections for Conformance in WS-Policy and WS-PolicyAttachment [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Add empty sections for Conformance in WS-Policy and WS-PolicyAttachment [on Editors - due 2006-08-30].
resolution: close the issue 3586 - no changes in the doc
<cferris> RESOLUTION: close the issue 3586 - no changes in the doc, effectively solved by other work
David: Issue 3562 - the work is ongoing
Paul: Issue 3592 is not in the scope
<cferris> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3592
Glen: looks implementation specific
<monica> I think this is actually playback.
<scribe> ACTION: Willima to chech on Seimas whether to close the issue 3592 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Willima
<cferris> action 4 = William to check on Seumas as to whether to close issue 3592
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3616
Paul: proposes to make it as a candidate to be resolved next
Glen: agrees
<danroth> +1 to Glen's comment and the chair's proposal
Dale: negotiation - out-of-scope
<GlenD> As long as we don't preclude discussion of negotiation use-cases, I think we're good to push particular negotiation mechanisms, etc, off to v.next
Dale:
intersection is not defined
... not an issue
<cferris> note: Dale might want to augment the minutes with his points on the possible inclusion of some ranking attribute
Chris: there was a lot of support for negotian at F2F
Paul: mark the issue as be done next
<dmoberg> A prerequisite of negotiation is that some way of marking ranking or preference exists. So no point of going into negotiation without the prerequisites. But maybe some blessed way of putting ranking on policy alternatives would be useful. Paul notes that this can always be done by an extension.
<cferris> RESOLUTION: Issue 3616 closed and marked as v.next: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3616
<cferris> ACTION: PaulC and Chris to investigate how to mark/close an issue as designated for v.next [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - PaulC
<monica> yes it did
<asir> ACTION: Editors to implement the resolution for issue 3561 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-68 - Implement the resolution for issue 3561 [on Editors - due 2006-08-30].
<asir> ACTION: Chris to update issue 3561 (on behalf of Felix) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Chris
<cferris> RESOLUTION: 3561 close with proposal in message 65 as amended by 73
b) Policy Application to Web services Model description inac
<prasad> Applied in the Web services
<prasad> model, policy is used to convey the conditions for an interaction between a Web
<prasad> service requestor and a Web service provider.â€E/p>
<asir> ACTION: Editors to implement the resolution for issue 3552 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-69 - Implement the resolution for issue 3552 [on Editors - due 2006-08-30].
RESOLUTION: close with the issue http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3552
<FrederickHirsch> 3549 proposal : http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/att-0117/policy-framework-3549-proposal.pdf
<cferris> RESOLUTION: Issue 3552 closed with proposal in bugzilla entry http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3552
c) Require assertions to be distinguished from parameter elements, Frederick http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3549
Frederick:
proposes to continue the discussion
... this issue is only to separate parameters from assertions
Paul: Frederick needs clarifications on the email loop http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0117.html
Frederick: normalization now is a separate issue
Dan: please provide some examples to illustrate the ambiguity
Frederick: need to add some additional details in the text to overall model
Asir: agrees on the substance but need to understand what exactly should be clarified
Fabian: please define the term "nested assertion"
<paulc> nested assertion is still not defined in Frederick's proposal
Dan: the text is correct. Clarifying the issue may create a problem
Frederick: the goal was to have a discussion and also to make it clear how to do the nesting
<asir> Frederick, I answered this question on e-mail - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0140.html
Christopher: need clarification of the issue
Dan: proposes to discuss the issue in Primer
Paul: Frederich should enumarate the questions, and others to review
Maryann: Amend the proposal to move this to Primer
Monica: also proposes to consider pushing this to Primer
<monica> Correction: We should be conscious not to push so much to the Primer so it doesn't implicitly become a normative document.
<scribe> ACTION: Frederick to enumarate th equestion - issue http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3549 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action09]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-70 - Enumarate the questions - issue http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3549 [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2006-08-30].
<scribe> ACTION: Dan to review for issue 3549 the material in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0117.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action10]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Dan
<danroth> ACTION: danroth to review for issue 3549 the material in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0117.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action11]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - danroth
Paul: Issue 3557 - Asir to get clarification from Ashok through email
<cferris> expectation setting, re-raise this discussion after umit and ashok have had a chance to respond
<maryann> so chris suggested that Umit will be on vacation and that she will then probably need some time to respond to issue 3557
<asir> Chris Proposal - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0130.html
<asir> Asir's Amendments - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0133.html
Christopher:
Issue 3544 - proposal to clarify list of elements, which are extensible
via elements or attributes
... agrees with Asir's ammendments
<asir> ACTION: Editors to implement the resolution for issue 3544 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action12]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-71 - Implement the resolution for issue 3544 [on Editors - due 2006-08-30].
<cferris> RESOLUTION: Issue 3544 closed with proposal from Chris as amended by Asir's email 133 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0133.html
Frederick: Proposes to close the issue
Item not correct: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0063.html
Asir: agrees with Frederick
<FrederickHirsch> explanation - case cannot occur
<cferris> RESOLUTION: Issue 3548 closed with exlanation in bugzilla entry http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3548. The edge case can never occur
Paul: there is no any proposal
<cferris> glen intends this to start the discussion
<cferris> paul suggests some email discussion working off of this thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0138.html
<maryann> update with a pointer to the email thread?
<scribe> ACTION: Glen to update 3577bugzilla [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action13]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-72 - Update 3577bugzilla [on Glen Daniels - due 2006-08-30].
<cferris> action 13 = Glen to update 3577bugzilla entry with the suggested format we're using
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Jul/0039.html
<asir> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0075.html
<cferris> continue discussion of issue 3564 on the mailing list
Paul: proposes to continue the email discussion
Glen: clarifies that email thread contained the necessary details. Will add them to bugzilla
<whenry> I had replied to Umit on this topic - I replied to the group
a) Policy framework should document extensibility points
David: Issue
3590 is open. The proposal from Asir to close without action
... framework has extensibility points, which are documented well
... Attrribute can be added to the policy or to the policy reference
Child elements for policy reference. Any child should be treated as assertion. It should be documented
David: make a change in a notational convention
Christopher: Proposes to close the issue and assign it to the Editors.
<cferris> here are the 5 :
<cferris> wsp:Policy/@{any}
<cferris> wsp:Policy/.../wsp:PolicyReference/@{any}
<cferris> wsp:Policy/.../wsp:PolicyReference/{any}
<cferris> wsp:Policy/wsp:ExactlyOne/@{any}
<cferris> wsp:Policy/wsp:ExactlyOne/wsp:All/@{any}
<cferris> the first two can be handled editorially, since the elipses are already in the spec
<asir> link is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Aug/0108.html
<cferris> daveo's are about attributes... asir's point out element extensibility
David: extensibility points are not clearly documented
<cferris> daveo suggests that this confusion may be exactly why we need some clarity in the spec
<cferris> proposal part 1, document attribute extensbility of wsp:Policy/@{any} and wsp:Policy/.../wsp:PolicyReference/@{any}
<cferris> part2 are the remaining 3 in bugzilla
<cferris> plus the ones pointed out by Asir
<cferris> +1 to daveo
Paul: need email dialog between Asir and David about extensibilty points
<cferris> ACTION: Editors to apply proposal part 1, document attribute extensbility of wsp:Policy/@{any} and wsp:Policy/.../wsp:PolicyReference/@{any} [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action14]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-73 - Apply proposal part 1, document attribute extensbility of wsp:Policy/@{any} and wsp:Policy/.../wsp:PolicyReference/@{any} [on Editors - due 2006-08-30].
Chris: Proposes to make everything extansible
<Fabian> now, bijan, that's at least a motivation we can put in the spec :-)
<cferris> ACTION: Asir and daveO to carry on the discussion of extensibility points on the mailing list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-ws-policy-minutes.html#action15]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-74 - And daveO to carry on the discussion of extensibility points on the mailing list [on Asir Vedamuthu - due 2006-08-30].
Asir: Proposes to create a new issue with the requirements to extensibility points
David and Paul disagree
<cferris> paul agrees with daveo that there is no need of the overhead of a separate issue for dealing with those points that are in disagreement
Maryann: already sent a note to WS-Addressing
Paul: please update in bugzilla
Christopher: Proposes to defer c)
f)Clarify conversion of compact to normal form in Framework section 4.
Frederick: Possibly there are some issues in specifying the normalization process
Paul: Need to start email thread with bug# reference
and insert the link to bugzilla
Paul: email dialog + bugzilla