<trackbot> Date: 21 July 2009

<eric> Derek - are you going to have a phone presence?

Appointment of the scribe

<scribe> Scribe: Mark

<eric> Minutes from last call: http://www.w3.org/2009/07/14-soap-jms-minutes.html

Minutes

No revisions

Review the agenda

Eric: We should add an AOB item for UDDI question

Review action items

Actions: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/open

Eric: No progress on 32
... No progress on action 91

Mark: Proposed changes for action 92 sent to mailing list

Derek: No progress on 68

close action-92

<trackbot> ACTION-92 Propose the wording for the change to split 2024 into three testable assertions closed

Eric: no progress on 93

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Jul/0013.html

Proposal for action 92 linked above

Rework Protocol-2021 http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-soapjms-20090604/#Protocol-2021

Eric: Suggest a single assertion "The client must create the property according to these rules"
... then set out the rules "The requestURI must be derived from the supplied URI by leaving the destinationName as-is, and removing the targetService and replyToName"
... "The client SHOULD remove deliveryMode ...., MAY remove ..." etc
... Put the rules first then have an assertion which states that the conforming client MUST follow the rules

Mark: Will have another go at the wording based on those comments

action mark to reword the protocol-2024 proposal

<trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - mark

<trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. mhapner, mphillip)

action mphillip to reword the protocol-2024 proposal

<trackbot> Created ACTION-94 - to reword the protocol-2024 proposal [on Mark Phillips - due 2009-07-28].

URI specification:

Eric: Have not heard from Dongbo yet

Mark: Still waiting for IBM counsel to approve

Eric: No word from Peter & Progress
... Once we have approval I will start to push the RFC forward again

Specification changes process

Eric: Edits are clearly needed, but we need to track them very carefully and justify them, to avoid going back to working draft state
... Proposed process is outlined in agenda
... i.e.

Proposed process:

* Emails submitted on mailing list - issues should be individual:

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/#issues

* Each item tracked in our tracker.

* Issues remain "open" until we have the revised text in a copy

of the spec, and agree to it.

No objection to this process

action Eric to Raise a tracking issue for each of the specification changes we have proposed

<trackbot> Created ACTION-95 - Raise a tracking issue for each of the specification changes we have proposed [on Eric Johnson - due 2009-07-28].

FAQ - action item follow-up

Derek: No progress

FAQ - review of proposed questions

<eric> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Jul/0010.html

<eric> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Jul/0011.html

Eric: Proposed questions sent to list (see above )

Phil: All look like good questions

Derek: Agreed

Amy: OK too

Mark: Asks for clarification on Eric's first question

Eric: One of first statements in spec is that interoperability between JMS providers is out of scope... will reword the question

Mark: Maybe a question about which implementations are tested

Eric: That will be included in an exit report as part of the specification process

thanks Yves :-)

Eric: We'll use that question to point to the record of testers & conformant impls

Amy: May send further questions to list

action Amy to formulate further FAQ questions

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Amy

action alewis to formulate further FAQ questions

<trackbot> Created ACTION-96 - Formulate further FAQ questions [on Amelia Lewis - due 2009-07-28].

action Derek to formulate further FAQ questions

<trackbot> Created ACTION-97 - Formulate further FAQ questions [on Derek Rokicki - due 2009-07-28].

action Phil to formulate further FAQ questions

<trackbot> Created ACTION-98 - Formulate further FAQ questions [on Phil Adams - due 2009-07-28].

action Eric to Edit the FAQ page to add a general structure to the Wiki

<trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Edit the FAQ page to add a general structure to the Wiki [on Eric Johnson - due 2009-07-28].

Eric: We can all edit the Wiki to answer the questions

Phil: Will we need any special permissions

<Yves> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/wiki/Main_Page

Yves: May need to grant appropriate access - try it first then contact Yves if access denied

Implementations - any updates?

Derek: What's the timeline

Eric: As long as it takes - we don't get to Rec until we have two implementations. IBM has one in-flight

Phil: IBM WebSphere has delivered an implementation which we believe to comply

Eric: ...and CXF are working - see mailing list for link to status page
... Filed a bug against Apache Axis2 to update their SOAP/JMS implementation. Hope to do some work on it.
... TIBCO is working on an implementation - possible delivery <6 months

AOB?

UDDI note could be an FAQ entry

<eric> trackbot, generate minutes

<trackbot> Sorry, eric, I don't understand 'trackbot, generate minutes'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/92/91/
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: mphillip
Found Scribe: Mark
Default Present: Eric, alewis, +0196270aaaa, mphillip, Yves, Phil, Derek
Present: Eric alewis +0196270aaaa mphillip Yves Phil Derek
Regrets: Peter
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Jul/0009.html
Found Date: 21 Jul 2009
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/07/21-soap-jms-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.