See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 07 December 2010
trackbot, start telcon
<trackbot> Meeting: SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 07 December 2010
<alewis> err.
<alewis> we'd already started.
oops sorry
<alewis> :-)
<alewis> doesn't seem to have caused problems, though.
no, phew, good old trackbot
<scribe> Scribe: Mark
http://www.w3.org/2010/11/30-soap-jms-minutes.html
Minutes approved
No modifications to agenda
Eric: Propose we skip meeting of 28th
No objections
RESOLUTION: No meeting on 28th Dec.
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/222 - Derek - no status
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/223 - Phil - no progress
Phil: Planning to work on this over Christmas period
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/230 - Mark - no progress
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/231 - Mark - complete
close action-230
<trackbot> ACTION-230 Apply the changes for ISSUE-67 closed
close action-231
<trackbot> ACTION-231 Come up with a concrete proposal to resolve issue 68 closed
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/232 - Eric - Complete
close action-232
<trackbot> ACTION-232 Revise the proposal with Amy's addition and the fault in the proposal closed
(see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Dec/0001.html )
Eric: Any issues, comments & concerns regarding producing a conforming implementation
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/65
See Eric's email (link above WRT action 232)
Eric: made modifications to proposal noted in previous meeting
Peter: Contacted CXF who want this feature, so this is a welcome & timely addition
Eric: Should we wait for CXF to review this proposal before changing the spec.
Sounds like a good idea if we think there are people who will review the proposal
All: No objection to waiting a week for comments from CXF
<scribe> ACTION: Peter to forward proposal for ISSUE-65 to CXF folk for their approval [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/12/07-soap-jms-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-233 - Forward proposal for ISSUE-65 to CXF folk for their approval [on Peter Easton - due 2010-12-14].
Next issue : http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/66
Peter: These changes have been
applied
...
http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/testcases/testcases/testcases.html
... Have added Test0020 to cover Protocol-2070
http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/testcases/testcases/testcases.html#test0020
Peter: This is an optional test for the queue variant (topicReplyToName)
Eric: Would it be worth mentioning in the text for the test that this would involve vendor-specific use of the API to specify the destination name (passed to the Session.createQueue )
(and Session.createTopic)
Eric: Probably unnecessary to spell this out - the test will all require some tweaks / JNDI setup to get them running
Peter: The other change is to add references to WSDLUsage3003, WSDLUsage3004 in WSDL tests test0006 test0007 test0009 test0010 test0013 test0014 test0015 test0016
RESOLUTION: The applied resolution is accepted - ISSUE-66 is closed
Mark: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/68
<eric> Mark's latest email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Dec/0004.html
Mark: Proposal to set heaer properties on the producer instead of the message
RESOLUTION: The new proposal is accepted as-is
<scribe> ACTION: Mark to apply the resolution for ISSUE-68 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/12/07-soap-jms-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-234 - Apply the resolution for ISSUE-68 [on Mark Phillips - due 2010-12-14].
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/67 - pending application of resolution per ACTION-230
Eric: Posted new draft with
language to register IANA JMS URI scheme variants
... Review came back with 3 comments
... One on the formatting - caused by conversion to text , one
because the URI examples were not indented - so Eric has
indented the samples
... We should now be ready to submit for final review
... Contacted various open-source implementations of JMS to
bring the JMS URI to their attention (ActiveMQ, QPID), plus
Oracle
... No feedback to date
... Draft 10 is the latest draft - will chase up IETF later
today
Mark: Potential issue with
BytesMessage being written and read in different ways (e.g.
writeBytes, and readUTF)
... Will send details to the list
Eric: Yes, we nned to understand the scope of the possible change to the spec. e.g. normative, non-normative, FAQ etc.
action mark to get details of potential BytesMessageproblem
<trackbot> Created ACTION-235 - Get details of potential BytesMessageproblem [on Mark Phillips - due 2010-12-14].
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) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: mphillip Found Scribe: Mark Default Present: alewis, Mark, eric, +1.781.280.aaaa, padams Present: alewis Mark eric +1.781.280.aaaa padams Found Date: 07 Dec 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/12/07-soap-jms-minutes.html People with action items: mark peter WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]