See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: cferris
minutes from 9/12 approved as posted
deferred
<scribe> ACTION: [DONE] Chris to create issue from Mark's email and close with no action [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action01]
<scribe> ACTION: [DONE] Chris to follow-up with Yves to make [publication] happen next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action02]
<scribe> ACTION: [PENDING] Chris to upload new implementation page. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action03]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2007Oct/0005.html
Fabian proposes to delete the 3rd paragraph and add the fourth in his change proposal
jonathan: not sure that is quite right
chris: what if we removed "in the absence of such an indicator"?
jonathan: thinking...
... looking at 4506
the last sentence in the issue resolution was: "To ensure that a response message is serialized as application/xop+xml a client
can send an application/xop+xml request message."
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4506
chris: looks like cut-n-paste error
jonathan: yes, looks that way
... just add "To " to the 3rd paragraph
chris: all agree to adopt original resolution and add word "To"?
jonathan: still slightly lost, think adding "To" is right
unanimous
RESOLUTION: close issue 5173 by adding "To" to the garbled sentence and move to 4th paragraph as in the original issue resolution for 4506
<Jonathan> OK followed all the links - don't see anything that modifies the "to".
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to send response to Fabian with WG's resolution [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action04]
RESOLUTION: agree that citations should be consistent and that we need to recheck all the links to ensure that they are all current
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2007Sep/0000.html
<Jonathan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2007Sep/0000.html
anish: can we update homepage to link to bugzilla?
yves: sure, I updated but will check
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to respond to Mohamed re: 5174 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action05]
chris: next issue 5175
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5175
chris: agrees
jonathan: may be overkill to include references to multipart/related and XOP
<Yves> side note: resolution of Fabian's issue is in the edcopy (and edcopy updated.
jonathan: replace "using" with ...
chris: here's what sect 1 says now:
This specification describes a domain-specific policy assertion for the SOAP Message Transmission Optimization Mechanism W3C Recommentation [MTOM] that can be specified within a policy alternative as defined in Web Services Policy 1.5 - Framework [WS-Policy]. For backwards compatibility, the policy assertion can also be used in conjunction with the SOAP 1.1 Binding for MTOM 1.0 [MTOMS11] Member Submission.
anish: he is adding second sentence
jonathan: let's accept what he has suggested
anish: what does change is whether section 4 is
implied by the assertion or not
... sect 4 is about http/soap features
... think it says how soap/http binding deals with the feature
chris: in abstract only references section 3
anish: if I have this on a binding that is
soap/http, am I required to do what section 4 sez?
... and if I put it on a non-soap/http binding, what does it mean
chris: get rid of section reference altogether?
anish: if we want this to be used for other bindings...
jonathan: which we do
anish: for intro, what ram proposes is okay
jonathan: good with ram's proposal
RESOLUTION: issue 5175 closed with proposal from Ram as described in issue
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to respond to Ram re issue resolution for 5175 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action06]
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to open new issue related to discussion above for reinforcing section 3.3 as specific to binding protocol details [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action07]
<scribe> ACTION: Anish to draft proposal for new issue against section 3.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action08]
no takers
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to reply to Paul regarding no action/comments from XMLP WG on primer and guidelines [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html#action09]
call next week
NO call the following week due to ws-i f2f and anish in tokyo
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128 of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: cferris Inferring ScribeNick: cferris Default Present: Chris_Ferris, Jonathan_Marsh, Yves, Anish Present: Chris Yves Jonathan Anish WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Got date from IRC log name: 10 Oct 2007 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-xmlprotocol-minutes.html People with action items: anish chris[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]