20:25:51 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
20:25:51 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-irc
20:26:01 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ws-ra
20:26:26 <Bob> zakim, this will be #WS_WSRA
20:26:26 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, Bob
20:26:36 <Bob> zakim, this will be WS_WSRA
20:26:36 <Zakim> ok, Bob; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
20:26:56 <Bob> meeting: WS-Resource Access Working Group
20:27:04 <Bob> chair: Bob Freund
20:28:52 <Bob> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0122.html
20:28:57 <prasad> prasad has joined #ws-ra
20:29:21 <Sumeet> Sumeet has joined #ws-ra
20:29:34 <Zakim> WS_WSRA()3:30PM has now started
20:29:36 <Zakim> +Don_Wright
20:29:39 <Zakim> +Bob_Freund
20:29:41 <Zakim> + +1.408.876.aaaa
20:29:42 <Zakim> - +1.408.876.aaaa
20:29:42 <Zakim> + +1.408.876.aaaa
20:30:05 <Zakim> +SVij
20:30:23 <Ashok_Malhotra> Ashok_Malhotra has joined #ws-ra
20:30:29 <Bob> zakim, aaaa is prasad
20:30:30 <Zakim> +prasad; got it
20:30:42 <Zakim> + +1.408.274.aabb
20:30:47 <dug> dug has joined #ws-ra
20:31:09 <Zakim> +Tom_Rutt
20:31:16 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
20:31:18 <Bob> zakim aabb is fmaciel
20:31:30 <TRutt1> TRutt1 has joined #ws-ra
20:31:34 <Bob> zakim, aabb is fmaciel
20:31:34 <Zakim> +fmaciel; got it
20:31:47 <Zakim> +[IBM]
20:32:13 <Zakim> +Mark_Little
20:32:13 <Bob> zakim, [IB is dug
20:32:13 <Zakim> +dug; got it
20:32:22 <Zakim> +JeffM
20:32:42 <Zakim> +Wu_Chou
20:32:56 <Zakim> +gpilz
20:32:57 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
20:33:13 <Zakim> +??P32
20:33:17 <Wu> Wu has joined #ws-ra
20:33:29 <gpilz> gpilz has joined #ws-ra
20:33:40 <asir> asir has joined #ws-ra
20:34:01 <li> li has joined #ws-ra
20:34:03 <Bob> zakim, P32 is katy
20:34:03 <Zakim> sorry, Bob, I do not recognize a party named 'P32'
20:34:40 <Katy> Katy has joined #ws-ra
20:36:18 <Bob> zakim, ??P32 is katy
20:36:18 <Zakim> +katy; got it
20:36:19 <jeffm> jeffm has joined #ws-ra
20:36:44 <Bob> V
20:36:49 <Bob> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0122.html
20:37:53 <Bob> scribe: Li Li
20:38:15 <gpilz> only in jury duty you get to meet a better class of people
20:38:16 <dug> lesson learned: be late  :-)
20:38:49 <li> approval of agenda
20:38:57 <li> agenda approved
20:39:09 <li> approval of minutes
20:39:37 <li> minutes approved w/o objection
20:40:21 <li> discussion of f2f meeting
20:41:59 <li> bob: discuss if to attend w3c tag meeting in ca in november
20:44:29 <li> bob: we need to decide by 10th march if to attend
20:45:08 <li> bob: review action items
20:45:34 <li> action #14
20:45:34 <trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax
20:45:52 <li> review action #14 - done
20:47:31 <li> bob: review FPWD
20:48:24 <li> ??: something missing in FPWD
20:48:34 <dug> s/??/Asir/
20:48:36 <Bob> s/??/Asir
20:48:40 <dug> s/something/link to issue list
20:48:52 <Ashok_Malhotra> q+
20:49:02 <Bob> ack ashok
20:49:36 <dug> q+
20:49:45 <Bob> ack dug
20:50:12 <li> bob: is it ok insert links to issue list
20:50:21 <li> dug: no benefit to do so
20:50:41 <asir> q+
20:50:47 <Bob> ack asir
20:51:59 <li> asir: issues should be inserted
20:52:02 <asir> please see item 3 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0083.html
20:52:50 <li> check item #3 in the above link
20:53:18 <Bob> proposal: In the status section of each spec, there should be a statement 
20:53:20 <Bob> that explains the intent of this working draft.  Perhaps something along 
20:53:21 <Bob> the lines of:  This working draft is meant only as a direct translation of 
20:53:23 <Bob> the submitted spec into W3C format.  There are many issues in the working 
20:53:24 <Katy> q+
20:53:24 <Bob> group that will cause changes to this draft.  Please see working group 
20:53:26 <Bob> issue list.
20:53:32 <Bob> ack katy
20:53:59 <li> kathy: is fpwd for w3c?
20:54:39 <li> bob: any objection to the proposal?
20:55:19 <li> ashok: problem with wording
20:56:04 <li> ??: object to proposal
20:56:35 <Bob> s/??/JeffM
20:57:36 <li> roll calling on proposal: y/n
20:57:53 <li> ibm: no
20:58:05 <li> avaya: abstain
20:58:09 <li> redhat: no
20:58:19 <li> software ag: abstain
20:58:44 <li> proposal failed 
20:59:12 <li> bob: any other objection to fpwd?
20:59:16 <li> asir: no
20:59:32 <Ashok_Malhotra> Oracle also voted 'No'
20:59:58 <li> bob: any objection to publish 5 fpwd?
21:00:24 <li> no objection, will request to publish them dated today
21:01:07 <li> bob: topic new issues
21:01:25 <Bob> Issue 6587
21:01:43 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6585
21:02:08 <Bob> s/85/87
21:02:24 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6588
21:03:28 <Bob> Action: Dug as owner of 6588
21:03:29 <trackbot> Created ACTION-17 - As owner of 6588 [on Doug Davis - due 2009-03-03].
21:03:38 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6594
21:05:19 <Bob> Action: Dug as owner of 6594
21:05:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-18 - As owner of 6594 [on Doug Davis - due 2009-03-03].
21:05:30 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6595
21:06:00 <dug> I'm sure the mute button learns all sorts of new phrases  :-)
21:06:17 <asir> :-)
21:07:41 <Geoff> +q
21:07:56 <Bob> ack geo
21:08:22 <li> geoff: how to set filter for future?
21:08:43 <dug> isn't this part of the issue discussion?
21:09:01 <li> gil: it's up to event source to decide
21:09:16 <Bob> Action: Gilbert as owner of 6595
21:09:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-19 - As owner of 6595 [on Gilbert Pilz - due 2009-03-03].
21:09:30 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6603
21:10:40 <Bob> Action: Geoff as owner of 6603
21:10:40 <trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - As owner of 6603 [on Geoff Bullen - due 2009-03-03].
21:10:54 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6604
21:11:53 <Bob> acton: Dug as owner of 6604
21:12:02 <Bob> action: Dug as owner of 6604
21:12:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - As owner of 6604 [on Doug Davis - due 2009-03-03].
21:12:14 <li> topic: issues with proposals
21:12:36 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6587
21:13:31 <Bob> action: katy crate proposal for 6587
21:13:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Crate proposal for 6587 [on Katy Warr - due 2009-03-03].
21:13:46 <li> katy: to improve proposal
21:13:58 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6398
21:14:42 <li> geoff: introduce the proposal
21:15:09 <Bob> Geof's proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0128.html
21:15:51 <li> geoff: align with http, backward comp, ws-i compliant
21:16:27 <li> options for compliant to bp: relax, use policy, or go to bp wg
21:17:16 <li> bob: any questions about the proposal?
21:17:50 <li> bob: objection to accept proposal?
21:18:02 <li> dug: why voting this one instead of mine?
21:18:02 <asir> asir has joined #ws-ra
21:18:07 <asir> q+
21:18:14 <Katy> q+
21:18:20 <Bob> ack asir
21:18:24 <gpilz> +q
21:19:09 <li> asir: not sure the proposal is adequately explained
21:19:20 <Bob> ack katy
21:19:34 <marklittle> +1 to Katy
21:19:45 <li> katy: thought voting for both
21:19:51 <Bob> ack gpi
21:19:55 <gpilz> -q
21:20:05 <li> gil: object to microsoft proposal
21:20:15 <asir> where is the consensus?
21:21:01 <li> bob: we have two proposals: geoff's and dug's. is dug's up to date?
21:21:42 <Geoff> +q
21:21:52 <Bob> ack geoff
21:21:58 <dug> here it is:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jan/0043.html
21:22:18 <Bob> that is the one in the bugzilla
21:22:35 <li> geoff: voting on it is too soon, need more time to discuss
21:22:48 <jeffm> maybe we all think we understand the differences
21:23:25 <Wu> q+
21:23:31 <Bob> ack wu
21:23:33 <li> bob: more questions about both proposals?
21:23:48 <gpilz> +q
21:23:51 <li> wu: we need more time until next week
21:24:04 <TRutt1> keyboard clacking, please mute
21:24:06 <Bob> ack gpi
21:24:10 <li> bob: we need to clear this.
21:24:21 <jeffm> +q
21:24:32 <Bob> ack jeff
21:24:42 <li> gil: two camps: back-comp vs. bp compliant, we should vote now
21:24:45 <Katy> +1 to voting and moving on
21:24:53 <marklittle> +1
21:24:53 <asir> -1 to vote without discussion
21:25:24 <li> bob: more discussion won't help change decision
21:26:04 <li> bob: will anyone change mind with more discussion?
21:26:54 <gpilz> FWIW I've read Geoff's proposal - I understand it and I object to it
21:27:12 <dug> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0128.html
21:27:17 <gpilz> I don't think any further discussion of it would change my opinion
21:27:59 <li> bob: no one will change decision, will call vote on A and B proposals
21:28:12 <li> A=geoff, B=dug
21:28:30 <marklittle> let's just say ibm or msft?
21:28:36 <dug> a=Jan43=IBM    b=feb128=MSFT
21:29:27 <li> will vote on ibm vs. microsoft
21:29:39 <li> oracle: ibm
21:29:42 <li> ms: ms
21:29:48 <li> hitachi: ibm
21:29:59 <li> avaya: abstain
21:30:03 <li> redhat: ibm
21:30:16 <li> software ag: abstain
21:30:38 <li> ibm: ibm
21:31:24 <li> bob: any formal objection
21:31:25 <Geoff> Micsrosoft objects to proposal a from IBM
21:31:45 <jeffm> +q
21:31:50 <marklittle> s/Micstosoft/Microsoft
21:31:56 <Bob> ack jeffm
21:32:09 <marklittle> s/Micsrosoft/Microsoft
21:32:35 <marklittle> +1 to Oracle. Has been pushed around for 3 weeks.
21:32:41 <li> jeffm: enough time for people to make up their mind
21:32:44 <dug> actually more - since the f2f
21:34:17 <li> bob: disentangling windows...
21:34:29 <Zakim> -Mark_Little
21:34:33 <li> http://www.w3c.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=6424
21:36:05 <li> geoff: ok with the proposal, come up with suggestions
21:36:46 <li> should we include wsa:To in the infoset?
21:37:22 <li> wu: it is for infoset, not redefine wsa
21:37:46 <Bob> q?
21:37:48 <dug> +1 to Geoff
21:38:11 <dug> its very confusing - it looks like we're either restating what's already in WSA or worse possibly changing it
21:38:14 <li> geoff: is wse wsa:to different from other usage of wsa:To?
21:39:37 <li> wu: it can support different usage
21:39:57 <li> geoff: more discussion offline
21:41:10 <li> dug: like it because it's simple and gives xml authority
21:41:44 <li> dug: geoff suggests more text in standard?
21:42:21 <li> geoff: infoset is also normative
21:43:01 <li> wu: we provide infoset and xml binding, implementations must conform to xml
21:43:12 <gpilz> +q
21:43:27 <Bob> ack gp
21:43:41 <asir> agree - both normative does not answer the question
21:44:28 <dug> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0106.html
21:44:35 <li> gil: both being normative can create problem
21:45:27 <li> wu: no requirement to produce xml from infoset, rather the mapping is defined by the standard
21:46:05 <li> wu: infoset and xml should be consistent, in case conflict, xml wins
21:46:28 <li> dug: normative != authoritive
21:46:33 <asir> what environment?
21:47:09 <li> authoritive can overwrite the other
21:47:10 <jeffm> +q
21:47:51 <li> wu: they are free of inconsistency and xml is authoritative
21:48:19 <Bob> ack jeffm
21:48:24 <Geoff> +q
21:48:31 <Bob> ack geo
21:48:35 <li> s/authoritive/authoritative/
21:48:40 <gpilz> +q
21:49:15 <li> geoff: cardinality is a potential consistency problem
21:49:35 <li> geoff: need to specify xml is authoritative
21:50:42 <li> geoff: infoset may cause inconsistency between different mappings
21:50:55 <Bob> ack gpi
21:51:03 <li> wu: infoset rules in that case
21:51:58 <li> gpilz: infoset is interesting but is theoretic and makes standard larger
21:52:04 <dug> q+
21:52:27 <Bob> ack dug
21:52:32 <li> wu: infoset helps on compression, works with other standards
21:53:17 <li> dug: ok with proposal, but object to adding more text to explain issues such as consistence
21:53:43 <asir> q+
21:53:50 <li> bob: is this proposal bad?
21:53:54 <dug> w/o the full description in the infoset section I think we'd reduce the chance of inconsistency
21:54:04 <gpilz> +q
21:54:07 <Bob> ack asir
21:54:08 <li> gil: not bad proposal but a bad idea
21:55:00 <dug> q+
21:55:07 <Bob> ack gpi
21:55:22 <li> ??: need more text to explain
21:55:28 <Bob> ack dug
21:56:07 <li> dug: add one sentence is sufficient
21:56:43 <Wu> q+
21:57:07 <dug> could we perhaps have Wu redo the proposal with Geoff's edits and see what it looks like?
21:57:07 <li> bob: general poll on if we should use infoset
21:57:18 <asir> +1 to dug
21:57:26 <jeffm> +q
21:57:42 <Bob> ack wu
21:57:45 <dug> if he wants - I don't think there are a lot of changes but they might be important to help people decide. 
21:57:54 <Bob> ack jeffm
21:58:00 <li> wu: infoset extends applicability of wse in a non intrusive way, urge group to leverage infoset
21:58:33 <li> ??: where are infoset used?
21:58:45 <Bob> s/??/jeffM
21:59:19 <jeffm> -q
21:59:22 <li> jeffm: practical use?
21:59:33 <li> wu: compression uses infoset
22:00:02 <li> bob: encourage wu to make next version or not?
22:00:16 <li> oracle: no
22:00:22 <li> hitachi: abstrain
22:00:37 <li> ibm: yes if minimal work
22:00:57 <li> microsoft: yes 
22:00:59 <li> avaya: yes
22:01:17 <li> redhat: ?
22:01:26 <li> software ag: ?
22:01:47 <li> bob: do next version of infoset by voting
22:01:49 <Bob> action: Wu to refine proposal for 6424
22:01:49 <trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Refine proposal for 6424 [on wu chou - due 2009-03-03].
22:02:03 <Zakim> -SVij
22:02:04 <Zakim> -JeffM
22:02:11 <Zakim> -gpilz
22:02:12 <li> bob: bye
22:02:12 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
22:02:13 <Zakim> -prasad
22:02:14 <Zakim> -Wu_Chou
22:02:14 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
22:02:17 <Zakim> -Tom_Rutt
22:02:18 <Zakim> -dug
22:02:18 <Zakim> -katy
22:02:20 <Zakim> -Don_Wright
22:02:22 <Bob> rrsagent, make logs public
22:02:22 <Zakim> -fmaciel
22:02:31 <prasad> prasad has left #ws-ra
22:02:43 <fmaciel> fmaciel has left #ws-ra
22:02:52 <gpilz> gpilz has left #ws-ra
22:03:08 <Bob> zakim, who was here?
22:03:08 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, Bob.
22:05:10 <Bob> rrsagent, generate minutes
22:05:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-ws-ra-minutes.html Bob
22:07:21 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, Bob_Freund, in WS_WSRA()3:30PM
22:07:23 <Zakim> WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
22:07:26 <Zakim> Attendees were Don_Wright, Bob_Freund, +1.408.876.aaaa, SVij, prasad, +1.408.274.aabb, Tom_Rutt, [Microsoft], fmaciel, [IBM], Mark_Little, dug, JeffM, Wu_Chou, gpilz,
22:07:28 <Zakim> ... Ashok_Malhotra, katy
22:51:55 <dug> dug has left #ws-ra
22:54:28 <TRutt1> TRutt1 has left #ws-ra