IRC log of ws-ra on 2009-08-25
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:19:15 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
- 19:19:15 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-ws-ra-irc
- 19:19:17 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 19:19:17 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #ws-ra
- 19:19:19 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be WSRA
- 19:19:19 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
- 19:19:20 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
- 19:19:20 [trackbot]
- Date: 25 August 2009
- 19:19:53 [PaulN]
- PaulN has joined #ws-ra
- 19:23:44 [Bob]
- Bob has joined #ws-ra
- 19:23:59 [Bob]
- trackbot, start telecon
- 19:24:01 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 19:24:03 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be WSRA
- 19:24:03 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
- 19:24:04 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
- 19:24:04 [trackbot]
- Date: 25 August 2009
- 19:27:12 [Zakim]
- WS_WSRA()3:30PM has now started
- 19:27:19 [Zakim]
- +Bob_Freund
- 19:27:37 [Bob]
- chair: Bob Freund
- 19:27:42 [Zakim]
- + +1.919.849.aaaa
- 19:28:03 [Zakim]
- + +1.207.827.aabb
- 19:28:04 [Bob]
- zakim, aaaa is Sreed
- 19:28:05 [Zakim]
- +Sreed; got it
- 19:28:07 [dug]
- dug has joined #ws-ra
- 19:28:27 [Bob]
- zakim, aabb is paulN
- 19:28:27 [Zakim]
- +paulN; got it
- 19:28:55 [Zakim]
- +Doug_Davis
- 19:29:27 [Ram]
- Ram has joined #ws-ra
- 19:29:35 [li]
- li has joined #ws-ra
- 19:30:16 [Zakim]
- +li
- 19:30:35 [Zakim]
- +??P11
- 19:31:20 [Ashok]
- Ashok has joined #ws-ra
- 19:31:35 [fmaciel]
- fmaciel has joined #ws-ra
- 19:31:53 [Zakim]
- +Ashok_Malhotra
- 19:32:11 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 19:32:12 [Zakim]
- +Vikas
- 19:32:25 [Zakim]
- +fmaciel
- 19:32:50 [Vikas]
- Vikas has joined #ws-ra
- 19:33:42 [asir]
- asir has joined #ws-ra
- 19:33:58 [DaveS]
- DaveS has joined #ws-ra
- 19:34:11 [Zakim]
- +Yves
- 19:34:11 [Zakim]
- +Tom_Rutt
- 19:34:25 [dug]
- hey bob
- 19:35:24 [Tom_Rutt]
- Tom_Rutt has joined #ws-ra
- 19:35:29 [Zakim]
- +gpilz
- 19:35:42 [Zakim]
- -li
- 19:35:43 [fmaciel]
- fmaciel has joined #ws-ra
- 19:35:50 [Bob]
- scribe: Li Li
- 19:35:57 [Bob]
- scribenick: Li
- 19:35:57 [Zakim]
- +Mark_Little
- 19:36:03 [gpilz]
- gpilz has joined #ws-ra
- 19:36:09 [Zakim]
- +li
- 19:36:23 [Sreed]
- Sreed has joined #ws-ra
- 19:36:49 [li]
- TOPIC: agenda
- 19:37:39 [Bob]
- minutes link http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/9/08/2009-08-18.html
- 19:37:54 [li]
- TOPIC: approval of minutes
- 19:38:11 [li]
- minutes accepted
- 19:38:45 [DaveS]
- Thank you Yves
- 19:39:55 [li]
- TOPIC: snapshot of mex and rt
- 19:40:17 [li]
- ram has some comments
- 19:40:58 [li]
- dug and ram figure out which comments
- 19:41:22 [dug]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0055.html
- 19:43:45 [li]
- snapshots of mex and rt accepted
- 19:44:38 [li]
- TOPIC: review action items
- 19:45:13 [dug]
- q+
- 19:45:36 [li]
- TOPIC: progress on ws-frag
- 19:45:40 [dug]
- q-
- 19:46:09 [li]
- ram: needs a few more days to polish
- 19:47:10 [li]
- bob: fpwd needs to be out by sept (next week) in order to hold out schedule
- 19:47:22 [li]
- ram: that's acceptable
- 19:47:47 [li]
- TOPIC: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7365
- 19:49:16 [li]
- bob: objection to proposal?
- 19:49:35 [li]
- 7365 resolved as proposed
- 19:50:00 [li]
- http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7235
- 19:50:11 [dug]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0070.html
- 19:52:09 [li]
- dug: explain issue and proposal
- 19:52:18 [dug]
- ** New dialect
- 19:52:20 [dug]
- definitions MUST include sufficient information for proper application.
- 19:52:21 [dug]
- For example, it would need to include the context (which data) over which
- 19:52:23 [dug]
- the filter operates. ***
- 19:53:34 [Zakim]
- -??P11
- 19:53:54 [asir]
- q+ to ask a question
- 19:54:14 [Zakim]
- +??P11
- 19:54:15 [li]
- bob: append proposed text to spec?
- 19:54:19 [Bob]
- ack asir
- 19:54:19 [Zakim]
- asir, you wanted to ask a question
- 19:54:52 [li]
- asir: when does context change?
- 19:55:28 [li]
- dug: context of xpath changes from envelope to event data
- 19:55:29 [asir]
- q+ to follow up
- 19:55:50 [li]
- context may change for other uri too, like actionURI
- 19:55:51 [Bob]
- ack asir
- 19:55:51 [Zakim]
- asir, you wanted to follow up
- 19:56:10 [gpilz]
- q+
- 19:56:24 [li]
- asir: i don't recall discussing change of context being discussed
- 19:56:37 [Bob]
- ack gp
- 19:56:52 [dug]
- "... a new dialect might be defined to support filtering based on data not included in the notification message itself."
- 19:56:54 [dug]
- q+
- 19:57:20 [li]
- gil: generic use of xpath is insufficient as it doesn't tell the context
- 19:57:42 [li]
- therefore, ws-e needs a new uri to convey the context
- 19:58:20 [li]
- asir: it's new to me that uri indicates context
- 19:58:24 [Bob]
- ack dug
- 19:58:59 [Tom_Rutt]
- q+
- 19:59:27 [asir]
- q+
- 19:59:30 [Bob]
- ack tom
- 19:59:45 [li]
- dug: filter always needs context
- 19:59:59 [li]
- tom: do we need context to complicate thing?
- 20:00:17 [Bob]
- ack asir
- 20:00:19 [Zakim]
- -Mark_Little
- 20:00:22 [li]
- dug: yes, we have filter on action, topic, etc. beside just event data itself
- 20:00:28 [dug]
- q+
- 20:00:51 [Bob]
- ack dug
- 20:01:12 [li]
- asir: uri needs to point to stable xpath
- 20:01:43 [li]
- dug: maybe to separate flexibility to another issue
- 20:02:15 [asir]
- q+
- 20:02:16 [li]
- bob: we can define a uri for backward compability
- 20:02:25 [Bob]
- ack asir
- 20:02:31 [gpilz]
- q+
- 20:02:53 [Bob]
- ack gp
- 20:03:13 [li]
- asir: it's ok if this is a simple case
- 20:03:15 [asir]
- asir: if we were to define our own namespace name then this would be a unique case and not set any precedence
- 20:03:44 [li]
- gil: we have to do it as gil explained the use cases
- 20:03:58 [li]
- s/gil/dug/
- 20:05:21 [li]
- asir: it's not clear what is replaced
- 20:05:34 [dug]
- q+
- 20:06:09 [li]
- dug: two parts: one is to swap out uri; the other is the text
- 20:07:27 [dug]
- next text is in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0070.html
- 20:07:37 [dug]
- s/next/new/
- 20:08:36 [li]
- figuring out the consolidated proposal...
- 20:09:35 [li]
- asir: make uri to xpath 1.0?
- 20:09:55 [li]
- daves: a different uri for xpath 2.0 then?
- 20:09:55 [asir]
- Here is the draft proposal
- 20:09:56 [asir]
- 1. Append to Section '[Body]/wse:Subscribe/wse:Filter/@Dialect
- 20:09:56 [asir]
- '
- 20:09:56 [asir]
- *** New dialect definitions MUST include sufficient information for proper application. For example, it would need to include the context (which data) over which the filter operates. ***
- 20:09:56 [asir]
- 2. Replace http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116 with http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ws-evt/Dialects/XPath10
- 20:10:13 [dug]
- 3. and similar for enum
- 20:10:29 [Ram]
- Ram has joined #ws-ra
- 20:11:06 [li]
- bob: any object to the above proposal to 7235?
- 20:11:21 [li]
- bob: resolved with no objection
- 20:11:33 [li]
- http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7270
- 20:12:04 [dug]
- Unless otherwise noted, all URIs are absolute URIs and URI comparison MUST be performed according to [RFC 3986] section 6.2.1.
- 20:12:39 [Ram]
- Ram has joined #ws-ra
- 20:13:20 [Ram]
- test
- 20:13:44 [gpilz]
- q+
- 20:13:48 [dug]
- q-
- 20:14:03 [gpilz]
- q-
- 20:14:10 [li]
- yves: it's better to stay within uri instead of iri
- 20:14:30 [li]
- object to the proposal?
- 20:14:31 [Ram]
- q+
- 20:14:38 [Bob]
- ack ram
- 20:14:59 [dug]
- q+
- 20:15:18 [li]
- ram: any exception to the general rule?
- 20:15:28 [dug]
- q-
- 20:15:51 [li]
- dug: i couldn't find any...
- 20:16:10 [Ram]
- q+
- 20:16:13 [li]
- 7270 resolved as proposed
- 20:16:29 [li]
- TOPIC: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7160
- 20:17:19 [dug]
- need format text :-)
- 20:17:22 [dug]
- s/format/formal/
- 20:17:26 [li]
- 7160 accepted
- 20:17:55 [li]
- bob: 7426 accepted as new issue
- 20:18:16 [Ram]
- q+
- 20:18:19 [li]
- bob: ban the use of iri where uri comparison is used
- 20:18:23 [Bob]
- ack ram
- 20:18:44 [dug]
- can we see some text?
- 20:19:44 [li]
- AI for yves to propose text for 7426
- 20:20:01 [asir]
- Action: Yves to propose text for issue 7426
- 20:20:01 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-97 - Propose text for issue 7426 [on Yves Lafon - due 2009-09-01].
- 20:20:36 [li]
- TOPIC: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7196
- 20:20:55 [asir]
- Didn't you resolve it last week?
- 20:20:59 [dug]
- q+
- 20:21:14 [asir]
- doubly resolved!
- 20:21:41 [Bob]
- ack dug
- 20:22:02 [li]
- bob: 7196 resolved
- 20:22:36 [dug]
- http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6533
- 20:22:52 [li]
- yves: explain the issue
- 20:22:58 [dug]
- q+
- 20:23:57 [Bob]
- ack dug
- 20:24:12 [li]
- dug: why do we need this?
- 20:25:01 [li]
- yves: we need to specify the property of that operation
- 20:25:20 [li]
- dug: do we need to do the same for "getstatus"?
- 20:25:47 [asir]
- q+
- 20:25:54 [li]
- yves: we should spell out for all safe operations
- 20:26:02 [Bob]
- ack asir
- 20:26:03 [gpilz]
- +1
- 20:26:07 [li]
- dug: then we need to apply it to all specs
- 20:26:58 [li]
- asir: why not idempotent?
- 20:27:13 [asir]
- Here is a link to Feb discussion ... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Feb/0045.html
- 20:27:36 [gpilz]
- q+
- 20:27:44 [Bob]
- ack gp
- 20:27:46 [li]
- yves: we could do that if people like it
- 20:28:09 [li]
- gil: this is a constraint on implementations
- 20:28:43 [li]
- ..we should do it for other specs as well
- 20:28:49 [dug]
- +1 obviously
- 20:29:14 [li]
- gil: find all safe operations first
- 20:29:58 [li]
- ACTION: yves to include all safe operations in all specs
- 20:29:58 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-98 - Include all safe operations in all specs [on Yves Lafon - due 2009-09-01].
- 20:30:15 [gpilz]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/att-0057/wseventing_6401-6.html
- 20:30:41 [li]
- TOPIC: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6401
- 20:30:52 [Zakim]
- -Sreed
- 20:31:21 [li]
- gil: explain the new proposal 6401
- 20:31:58 [dug]
- q+
- 20:32:29 [dug]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/att-0061/ws-eventing-6401-6-dug2.doc
- 20:32:51 [li]
- looks ok to me
- 20:33:45 [dug]
- interesting - I'm missing the section header for appendix A when I look at the html version too - but the word doc is ok
- 20:38:21 [li]
- dug: some editorial changes, remove duplicates about mex
- 20:38:24 [Bob]
- Dug presents an amended proposal
- 20:38:33 [Ram]
- I would like to understand this sentence in Dug's revision: "An Event Source there MUST NOT exist more than one EventDescription document."
- 20:38:55 [Ram]
- q+
- 20:38:58 [dug]
- q-
- 20:39:05 [Bob]
- ack ram
- 20:39:25 [gpilz]
- q+
- 20:39:37 [li]
- ram: why that constraint?
- 20:40:04 [Bob]
- ack gp
- 20:40:19 [li]
- dug: it's in the original proposal
- 20:40:34 [asir]
- q+
- 20:41:36 [li]
- gil: more than ED document complicates relations to NW
- 20:41:52 [Bob]
- ack asir
- 20:42:06 [dug]
- q+
- 20:42:32 [li]
- asir: i don't fully understand the requirement
- 20:42:48 [li]
- ...to relate ED and NW
- 20:43:06 [Bob]
- ack dug
- 20:44:26 [asir]
- q+
- 20:44:45 [li]
- dug: one ED doc should be returned, more than one adds complexity
- 20:45:20 [li]
- ... one ED doc hides complexity
- 20:45:20 [Bob]
- ack asir
- 20:45:36 [dug]
- q+ to ask a clarifying question
- 20:45:53 [li]
- asir: multiple docs is supported by mex in multi sections
- 20:46:07 [gpilz]
- q+
- 20:46:16 [Bob]
- ack dug
- 20:46:16 [Zakim]
- dug, you wanted to ask a clarifying question
- 20:46:44 [li]
- dug: what subscriber do with multii docs?
- 20:46:58 [li]
- s/multii/multi/
- 20:47:48 [li]
- asir: client handles multi-docs according to the standards
- 20:47:48 [Bob]
- ack gp
- 20:48:41 [li]
- gil: we are profiling mex
- 20:48:59 [Zakim]
- +Doug_Davis.a
- 20:49:14 [li]
- ...we make it clear how different parts are related
- 20:49:15 [asir]
- Gil - i was only trying to help you! Nothing more.
- 20:49:44 [Zakim]
- +Doug_Davis.aa
- 20:49:48 [Zakim]
- +JeffM
- 20:49:51 [Zakim]
- -Doug_Davis.a
- 20:50:11 [dug]
- dug has joined #ws-ra
- 20:50:27 [dug]
- sorry - power went out
- 20:50:28 [li]
- ...if two ED docs and two NW docs are returned, then which goes which is not clear
- 20:51:08 [dug]
- q+
- 20:51:14 [dug]
- q-
- 20:52:16 [asir]
- Vow .. are we closing 6401?
- 20:52:18 [li]
- +q
- 20:52:22 [dug]
- never! :-)
- 20:52:43 [Bob]
- ack li
- 20:53:54 [dug]
- I can send in a new rev with the typo that Ram noticed fixed
- 20:53:54 [Ram]
- q+
- 20:54:02 [dug]
- if people want
- 20:54:20 [Bob]
- ack ram
- 20:54:43 [li]
- li: would like to read it
- 20:55:18 [li]
- ram: we would like to postpone it until next week
- 20:56:09 [Ram]
- q+
- 20:56:26 [li]
- bob: review dug's proposal next week as basis of 6401
- 20:56:59 [DaveS]
- Goodnight
- 20:57:03 [Zakim]
- -Ashok_Malhotra
- 20:57:06 [gpilz]
- good job li!
- 20:57:07 [li]
- bob: declare victory for today...
- 20:57:10 [Zakim]
- -fmaciel
- 20:57:11 [Zakim]
- -[Microsoft]
- 20:57:12 [Zakim]
- -Yves
- 20:57:13 [Zakim]
- -Vikas
- 20:57:15 [Zakim]
- -Bob_Freund
- 20:57:16 [Zakim]
- -Doug_Davis.aa
- 20:57:17 [Zakim]
- -Tom_Rutt
- 20:57:19 [Zakim]
- -??P11
- 20:57:20 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-ws-ra-minutes.html Yves
- 20:57:21 [Zakim]
- -li
- 20:57:27 [gpilz]
- gpilz has left #ws-ra
- 20:58:10 [Zakim]
- -paulN
- 20:58:18 [Zakim]
- -JeffM
- 20:58:48 [Zakim]
- -Doug_Davis
- 21:05:01 [Zakim]
- disconnecting the lone participant, gpilz, in WS_WSRA()3:30PM
- 21:05:02 [Zakim]
- WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
- 21:05:04 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Bob_Freund, +1.919.849.aaaa, +1.207.827.aabb, Sreed, paulN, Doug_Davis, li, Ashok_Malhotra, [Microsoft], Vikas, fmaciel, Yves, Tom_Rutt, gpilz, Mark_Little, JeffM