See also: IRC log
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/2007/02/28-ws-policy-minutes.html
need to add Yakov to the list
<paulc> Yakov was at the Feb 28 meeting. Minutes updated.
minutes approved
Next meeting is Sunnyvale, Ca F2F Mar 13-15
also an interop (adjancent)
a person from HP will attend the interop event
<sanka> wso2 is expecting host the interop endpoints remotely .
chairs felt this is good for interop (for HP ) to attend the interop
current drafts at http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/policy/#drafts
for interop, round 1 and round 2 no intersection matrix
round 3 nxn matrix people can fill in their success in the matrix
round 4 testing there will be a matrix also
next we will collect who is ready to do what
we nned as much of the matrix filled in for round 3
People need to be frank and tell the interop party on ehat they can test
<maryann> so IBM has endpoints up for round 1 & 2 testing
Asir, for round 3 took 1/2 day to get started, 2 days for end to end testing
Asir: , who is interested in round 4
paul, hp, may be layer 7, may be amber point and web methods
main interop m/s ibm, oracle, web methods?, layer 7, HP ?, sun ?, Bea?
+ wso2 ?
<sanka> WSO2 will be remote ..
there will wireless access and be hard wired no static IP
<paulc> Is there any company that will be remote only?
<paulc> for the interop?
<Fabian> Sun will be on site
<cferris> ACTION: Felix to ensure that we have Zakim reserved for the f2f [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/07-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-244 - Ensure that we have Zakim reserved for the f2f [on Felix Sasaki - due 2007-03-14].
<fsasaki> looked, we already have a zakim reservation
<sanka> yes
for interop, need to make sure that a seperate IRC or bridge for the participants can be arranged
<asir> Welcome Toufic!
Frederick reporting
2 interop doc, seperate 1 for round 4
doc in word and pdf
doc in word and pdf
been checked to cvs
xml and xml id are updated
ted
external policy attchement still work in progress
paul, where are the links
<monica> current links http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/interop/WS-Policy-Scenarios.pdf?rev=1.5&content-type=application/pdf
frederick checking, action xxx to that on fleix
<monica> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/ws/policy/interop/WS-Policy-Scenarios.pdf
felix will do this (add a note to the link 2)
<asir> Interop directory link - http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/interop/
<fhirsch3> Editors have created round4 document which includes UDDI scenarios and updated introduction W3C license, editor list and updated date
<fhirsch3> UDDI test files checked into CVS
<fhirsch3> UDDI test files checked into CVS
<fhirsch3> media type test case incorporated into Round 4 document. WG needs to determine actual document returned
<fhirsch3> Primer updated to resolve bug 3987 (lifecycle)
<fhirsch3> No open editorial issues on Framework, Attachment, Guidelines or Primer
ACTION-227 done
<cferris> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Mar/0046.html
<cferris> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Mar/0045.html
<cferris> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Mar/0044.html
attachment guidelines and primer need to be added to F2F agenda
ACTION-232 WSA is chewing on ws-policy and some common members are helping
chris we have a way fwd, may need to close it
ACTION-232 closed for now
ACTION-234 work in prgress,m asir preparing xml format... to autogenerate a report, friday is expeced date of delivery
ACTION-236 done
ACTION-237 done
asir, the link may need to be seperated, a bullet item for iterop documents
ACTION-238 , chris essentially who maintain and collect the info and keeps the result page, need to be discussed
ACTION-238 still open
ACTION-239, done
ACTION-240 done
ACTION-241, chris can not come up with an invalid policy, not sure that we have any
ACTION-241 defered to be discussed on the agenda
ACTION-242 ashok, already send them and asir found bugs in them
ashok will send a revised version tonite
ACTION-242 closed (but more work tbd????)
ACTION-243 due in 3 weeks from now
Action 244 is done
a) Test cases for xml:id, Asir (action 239)
message 32 is the best reference
Chris can u get your dog to be quite
thanks
tests adopted
<fsasaki> thanks to Asir for taking my AI over
adopted and added by the editors
c) Feature 22 test cases, Ashok
ACTION-240 Ashok to provide feature 22
there is a bug in them ashok will fix tonite
b) Feature 43, negative test cases, Chris
Chris can not screw up and create an invalid policy except when using attributes
ashok, how about operators
make stuff up in the policy name space
chris, can do the operators example,
asir, what would be the expected results?
chris, not getting and intersection for example
ashok, will be an assertion with other elements in iot
chris will update the isse to do that before the f2f
d) Feature 23, Ashok
still pending
e) test suite issue 4370: Round 2 WSDL 1.1 input file contains invalid references
asir, responce should have resolved the issue
f) WS-Policy Features and Interop Scenarios - Round 4, Prasad
no action required on the above
a) ISSUE 4040
Frederick, as a result of 4035, we deal with 4040 and 4035 togther
b) Issue 4213
this depends 4142
4213 is from umit, someone need to take it
maryann, will take 4213, proposal at f2f to close 4213
<scribe> ACTION: Maryann to propose a siolution to 4213 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/07-ws-policy-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-245 - Propose a siolution to 4213 [on Maryann Hondo - due 2007-03-14].
<cferris> ACTION: Maryann to propose resolution for 4213 (example for ignorable) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/07-ws-policy-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-246 - Propose resolution for 4213 (example for ignorable) [on Maryann Hondo - due 2007-03-14].
c) Issue 4262
<monica> I'd be happy to assist
<cferris> ACTION: Prasad to propose resolution to 4262, Monica to help [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/07-ws-policy-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-247 - Propose resolution to 4262, Monica to help [on Prasad Yendluri - due 2007-03-14].
d) Issue 4300
<scribe> ACTION: David Orchard start e-mails on 4300 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/07-ws-policy-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-248 - Orchard start e-mails on 4300 [on David Orchard - due 2007-03-14].
a) Feedback to WS-Addressing WG
no action needed
related issues 4374, 4375, 4376
no other published end points
layer 7 getting close
glen, is there a framework for inputing uri etc..
if people want their end point to be private, then send it to w3c member only (Paul c)
glen, suggest a page to do that, asir he is working on it ( the DOC>>>)
<cferris> s/geln/glen/
d) Discussion of interop infrastructure and setup requirements
already done in the call
chris, do we need a seperate interop mailing list
need to keep the stuff seprate
paulc ask if we can have a seperte list
<asir> public-ws-policy-interop@w3.org
<scribe> ACTION: Felix to creat a seperate interop list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/07-ws-policy-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-249 - Creat a seperate interop list [on Felix Sasaki - due 2007-03-14].
e) ACTION-234 Asir to provide format for recording interop results
due by friday
a) Issue 4331: WSDL WG comment 1
Ashok send mail on this, no discussion though
atatchment is missing
ashok having outlook problem (need training??)
<paulc> Because there is no WSDL 1.1 component model, the WSDL 1.1 fragment identifiers are to the WSDL 1.1 elements. Further, the fragment identifers are to the WSDL 1.1 elements prior to any processing of the WSDL document, such as validation, inclusion, imports, schema type validation, etc.
<Ashok> Further, the fragment identifers are to the WSDL 1.1 elements prior to any processing of the WSDL document, such as validation, inclusion, imports, schema type validation, etc.
above is the suggetsed warning
main problem is abuse of name space
respond to the wsdl wg with ashok text
david, does not understand the scenario they are talking about
same name space but different schema locations????
conatiner wsdl with no target name space (each is imported)
<cferris> not sure that I agree with that analysis
isse of how to define the wsdl doc, that is geneared as the result of parsing multiple doc is complicated...
worried that we will run into the proBPem again
ion what is the element identifier in wsdl 1.1 doc
chris, not sure he agrees with DO
may be a good idea to add a BP xx target namespace quoute
Chris, agree with DO second part, agree with ASHOk
DO, we can add 2 notes
ce of a targetname space in a wsdl (basically nneded)
note 2, BP requires the use of a target namespace
<Jonathan> chris, was the requirement for targetNamespace added between BP 1.0 and BP 1.x? I don't think it's in BP 1.0
proble wil not accure if u r BP xx compliant
chris need to verify whichBP
alreadynoted the 2 notes
note 2 say at least we should have a target namespace
<paulc> 1. Change text into one or more notes to make it more prominent.
<paulc> 2. Add a note saying this spec does not work if there is no TargetNamespace in the WSDL 1.1 document
<paulc> 3. Make the current text into a second note to cover other corner cases that do not work.
<dorchard> 1. Note: wsdl 1.1 EIs require are targetNamespace so wsdl documents without a targetNamespace will not have EIs.
<paulc> 4. Mention BP 1.x Requirement (if it exists) in the first note.
<paulc> 4. Mention BP 1.x Requirement (if it exists) in the first note.
<dorchard> 2. Further note: WS-I BP 1.1/1.2 require a targetNamespace allowing such documents to have EIs.
<paulc> This makes item 4 not feasible.
<paulc> That is Issue 4332.
Issue 4331 resolved with the propsal above items 1,2,3
<cferris> RESOLUTION: 4331 resolved with 1, 2 and 3 above
<asir> Related editorial action is http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/177
b) Issue 4332: WSDL WG comment 2
<paulc> Original thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Feb/0093.html
<asir> 4332 is related to 4045
<monica> Here is first comment: I have the recollection of agreeing NOT to include element/type decls.
<monica> I have the recollection of agreeing NOT to include element/type decls.
<monica> Umit quote
<monica> The inclusion of identifiers for element declarations and type definitions (which are not WSDL 1.1 elements) seems inappropriate in this spec.
chris, 4045 is opened for the reason of not talking about identifies as opposed to policy
<cferris> s/4045 is opened for the reason of not talking about identifies as opposed to policy/4045 was originally opened because I was worried that we would end up spending time on issues related to identifers that were unrelated to ws-policy wsdl attachment points/01
Need Paul proposal
<paulc> Proposal:
<paulc> 1. Remove the EIs for element declarations and type definitions
<paulc> 2. Add a paragraph to the status section noting that EI's are not defined by element declarations and type definitions and why
<paulc> 3. Ask for feedback on item 2.
<cferris> +1
<Jonathan> +1
<cferris> RESOLUTION: 4332 closed with 1, 2 and 3 above
<charltonb> +1
<paulc> This proposal resolves 4045 differently than before
<paulc> This proposal resolves 4045 differently than before
<asir> related editorial action is http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/178