20:24:11 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
20:24:11 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/02/01-ws-ra-irc
20:24:13 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
20:24:13 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ws-ra
20:24:15 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WSRA
20:24:15 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM already started
20:24:16 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
20:24:16 <trackbot> Date: 01 February 2011
20:27:07 <gpilz> gpilz has joined #ws-ra
20:27:49 <Zakim> +Bob_Freund
20:28:01 <Zakim> +Gilbert_Pilz
20:28:29 <dug> dug has joined #ws-ra
20:28:30 <li> li has joined #ws-ra
20:28:48 <Dave> scribenick:dave
20:29:16 <Zakim> + +1.908.696.aaaa
20:29:18 <Zakim> +Doug_Davis
20:29:35 <li> zakim, aaaa is li
20:29:35 <Zakim> +li; got it
20:30:02 <Ram> Ram has joined #ws-ra
20:30:15 <asoldano> asoldano has joined #ws-ra
20:30:28 <Zakim> +Yves
20:30:50 <Zakim> +asoldano
20:31:55 <Zakim> +Tom_Rutt
20:32:07 <gpilz> ~30F here - but I'm at 7,500 feet
20:32:08 <Ashok> Ashok has joined #ws-ra
20:32:31 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
20:33:10 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
20:33:27 <Tom_Rutt> Tom_Rutt has joined #ws-ra
20:33:55 <Dave> Topic: Agenda
20:34:23 <dug> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2011Feb/0000.html
20:35:41 <Dave> Agenda accepted.
20:35:42 <Ram> q+
20:36:17 <BobF> ack ram
20:36:39 <Dave> Ram: Still working on some of the issues still, but some are ok.
20:37:02 <Dave> Bob: Which ones are resolvable?
20:37:27 <Dave> We will do this as we come to them.
20:37:40 <Dave> The minutes are accepted: 
20:37:53 <Dave> Topic: F2F Logistics
20:38:23 <Dave> Gil was to look for a dinner spot.
20:38:49 <Dave> No changes to the table of implementations
20:39:00 <Dave> Topic: New Issues.
20:39:04 <dug> +q
20:39:27 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11874
20:39:38 <Dave> 11874: Accepted as a new issue.
20:40:06 <Dave> Recolved: Issue 11874 as proposed.
20:40:21 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11882
20:40:21 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11882
20:40:24 <dug> -q
20:40:31 <dug> q+
20:41:09 <Dave> Accepted as a new issue.
20:41:11 <BobF> ack dug
20:41:24 <Dave> Proposal to fix in the obvious way.
20:41:35 <Dave> Resolved as proposed.
20:41:51 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11894
20:41:52 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11894
20:42:58 <Dave> Issue accepted as a new issue.
20:43:14 <Dave> People need time on this one.
20:43:23 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11899
20:43:27 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11899
20:43:36 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=948
20:44:58 <Dave> Accepted as new issue.
20:45:29 <Dave> Resolved: As proposed.
20:45:39 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11928
20:45:47 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11928
20:46:58 <Dave> Bob: Yves will this be fixed by the publication process.
20:47:25 <Dave> Yves: I will take care of it.
20:47:33 <Dave> Resolved as proposed.
20:47:45 <Dave> ACTION: Yves to fix as recommended.
20:47:45 <trackbot> Created ACTION-174 - Fix as recommended. [on Yves Lafon - due 2011-02-08].
20:47:56 <gpilz> q+
20:49:04 <gpilz> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11850
20:49:40 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11850
20:50:04 <Dave> Gil this has no semantic change. It is just clarification
20:50:23 <dug> +1 - its non-normative text that clarifies
20:50:57 <Dave> Resolved: as proposed.
20:51:09 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11790
20:51:10 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11790
20:51:50 <Dave> Dug: Is a qname a proble for the dialogue type.
20:52:23 <dug> preferred solution: <mex:Dialect Type="{nsURI}localPart" ...
20:52:24 <Dave> Dug: Some parsers don't hold onto name spaces for qnames longenough.
20:53:15 <Tom_Rutt> q+
20:53:31 <Dave> Dug: It looks like we might be stuck with existing parses.
20:53:39 <BobF> ack tom
20:53:51 <gpilz> q?
20:53:54 <gpilz> q+
20:53:57 <gpilz> q-
20:53:59 <gpilz> q+
20:54:06 <Dave> Tom: Do you mean schema changes?
20:54:24 <Dave> Dug: Yes, but also definitions of what goes on the wire.
20:54:25 <BobF> ack gp
20:55:36 <dug> +q
20:55:47 <BobF> ack dug
20:55:56 <Dave> Dave: Says this approach works.
20:56:17 <Tom_Rutt> q+
20:56:29 <BobF> Note that dateTime is at risk
20:56:32 <Dave> Dug: We could support both. Make it a string and test for the first character "{"
20:56:37 <gpilz> q+
20:56:46 <BobF> ack tom
20:57:20 <Dave> Tom: Described how XML processors work, e.g. they need to do some context setting.
20:58:09 <dug> its an attribute
20:58:10 <Dave> Tom: In the XPath case there was no real context present. In the case we need to force it.
20:58:32 <Dave> Tom: I don't like the both ways options.
20:58:40 <BobF> ack gp
20:59:09 <Dave> Gil: I like the "{" approach - because I am lazy.
20:59:27 <Dave> Gil: Both is bad.
20:59:48 <dug> +q
20:59:54 <dug> <mex:Dialect Type="{nsURI}localPart" 
20:59:57 <BobF> ack dug
21:00:24 <Dave> BoB; Can we drop both?
21:00:55 <Dave> Ram: I don't know yet what the final picture is.
21:01:18 <Dave> Ram: Directionally, the above makes sense, but I need to talk.
21:01:31 <asoldano> I'm fine with single way
21:01:46 <gpilz> q+
21:01:55 <Dave> Bob: It sounds like a single way is the prefered approach.
21:02:04 <Tom_Rutt> q+
21:02:12 <Dave> Bob: Is there a common approach?
21:02:26 <Dave> Gil: The "{" approach is reasonable common.
21:02:39 <Dave> Dave: I has seen it too.
21:02:42 <BobF> ack gp
21:02:45 <dug> I'm pretty sure { isn't a valid char in a NS
21:03:05 <Dave> Gil: Is it too much work to work out the type?
21:03:08 <asoldano> that's a common way of doing a to-string conversion of NS
21:03:23 <BobF> ack tom
21:03:24 <Dave> Dug: I was only going to put it in the string.
21:03:38 <Dave> Tom: This is an application level issue.
21:03:42 <gpilz> q+
21:04:17 <BobF> ack next
21:04:20 <Dave> Tom: We define it the way we want.
21:04:40 <Ashok> q+
21:04:50 <Dave> Gil: Can we refine a string to enforse the format?
21:05:18 <BobF> ack next
21:05:39 <Dave> Ashok: You can do this with a pattern.
21:05:46 <dug> q+
21:06:01 <BobF> ack next
21:06:08 <Dave> Ashok: E.g. { + characters + } + charcaters.
21:06:23 <Dave> Ashok: I can help.
21:07:00 <Dave> Dug: This doesn't help much, since schema validation is usually off.
21:07:19 <Dave> Gil: With schema, the text is easier.
21:07:42 <dug> Ashok if you can send me the xsd I'll make a more formal proposal
21:07:54 <gpilz> my proposal for creating a simple type that defines "{namespace URI}local part" is about using schema as a spec documentation tool
21:08:28 <gpilz> it's not so much about schema validation - it's just that a human reader can look at the schema and know exactly what is required
21:08:33 <Dave> Resolution: The "{" approach looks like the direction. Please raise concerns ASAP.
21:08:44 <Ashok> I need to do a bit of work to figure out how to write the pattern
21:09:22 <Dave> Action: ashok will help Dug do this in schema.
21:09:23 <trackbot> Created ACTION-175 - Will help Dug do this in schema. [on Ashok Malhotra - due 2011-02-08].
21:10:03 <Dave> Issue 11865 needs a proposal
21:10:13 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11766
21:10:14 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11766
21:10:15 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=949
21:11:20 <Dave> Dug: The TX-Create was strange wrt empty representations. It seemed to imply support for empty was required.
21:11:53 <Dave> Dug: The text in Put looked better, so the proposal ti to apply this text to Create.
21:13:01 <Dave> Dug: Dug: There were some other text changes as well, including support for a fault.
21:13:25 <Dave> Dug: In Put there was a minor alignment change included.
21:13:57 <gpilz> q+
21:14:10 <Dave> Ram: This looks like the right directin.
21:14:11 <BobF> ack gp
21:14:22 <Dave> Gil: It looks OK, but for a nit.
21:15:01 <Dave> Gil: The reference to schema validation isn't really needed.
21:15:51 <Dave> Dug: I just want them consitent.
21:16:26 <Dave> Tom: Drop the word Schema.
21:16:37 <BobF> ack yve
21:16:51 <Dave> Yves: Maybe we just Put.
21:17:11 <Dave> Dug: It's not the semantics, but the text.
21:17:13 <gpilz> If an implementation that validates the presented representation detects that the presented representation is invalid 
21:17:44 <Dave> Dug: Looks OK.
21:18:01 <gpilz> If an implementation that validates the presented representation detects that that representation is invalid . . .
21:18:04 <Dave> Gil: There just might be other ways to do this.
21:18:20 <Ram> q+
21:18:27 <Dave> Dug: I can update the propose.
21:18:37 <BobF> ack ram
21:19:04 <Dave> Ram: Can empty still happen?
21:19:28 <Dave> Dug: Yes, but only if the schema supports it.
21:20:16 <Dave> Gil: So only some resources can do empty, but it is their choice.
21:20:32 <Tom_Rutt> q+
21:20:45 <Dave> Yves: The empty constructor was there to suppot later put to the resource
21:20:53 <Dave> Gil: There are other use cases.
21:21:12 <dug> q+
21:21:16 <BobF> ack tom
21:21:26 <Dave> Gil: The object defines what emapy constructure means.
21:21:45 <Dave> Tom: What does empty constriuctor mean?
21:22:01 <Dave> Gil: Various shades of nothingness.
21:22:33 <Dave> Gil: Either use default value, or actuallyempty.
21:23:11 <Dave> Gil: If it can't do it, fault (emptyness not allowed).
21:23:42 <Dave> Tom: How does the client know?
21:23:50 <Dave> Gil: It's out of band.
21:24:05 <dug> q+
21:24:13 <Dave> Bob: There is some work to do on this.
21:24:29 <BobF> ack dug
21:24:36 <Dave> Dug: I can update based on this discussion.
21:25:21 <Dave> Resolved: This is the right direction, e.g. do the right thing or fault.
21:25:32 <Dave> Action: Dug to revise the proposal.
21:25:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-176 - Revise the proposal. [on Doug Davis - due 2011-02-08].
21:25:54 <Dave> Bob: Can we make progress of these others?
21:26:24 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11698
21:26:26 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11698
21:26:43 <Dave> Dug: This is editorial.
21:27:19 <Dave> Dub: The wording is not clear. there are other examples in the specs that are already clearer in similar cases.
21:27:26 <Dave> Ram: Need more time.
21:28:59 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11703
21:29:09 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11703
21:29:30 <gpilz> q+
21:29:41 <Dave> Dug: This is just editorial, using the text from enumeration.
21:29:50 <BobF> ack gp
21:30:40 <Dave> Gil: You support filter, you supprt teh dialect I am using. Is this what I get back?
21:30:44 <Dave> Dug: Yes.
21:32:10 <Dave> Ram: there is a punction problem in the early part of the spec.
21:32:41 <Dave> Dug: I can do a comma, but it's a different spec.
21:32:53 <Dave> Bob: Just leave it.
21:33:16 <Dave> Resolved: Issue as proposed.
21:33:51 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11697
21:34:05 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11697
21:34:13 <Dave> Dug: Couldn't find a generic fault.
21:34:52 <Dave> Dig: I lean to CWNA.
21:35:37 <Dave> There was a slight drift into fantacy land.
21:35:50 <Dave> Ram: Isn't there a fault for this.
21:36:00 <Dave> Bob: Please find one.
21:36:35 <Dave> Bob: this appears to be outside of the protocol.
21:36:49 <Dave> Resolved: Close with no action.
21:36:50 <dug> q+
21:37:01 <BobF> ack dug
21:37:09 <dug> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11723
21:37:09 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11723
21:37:29 <Dave> Dug: This is the same as above. Close with no action.
21:37:58 <dug> q+
21:37:58 <Dave> Resolved: Close with no action.
21:38:27 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11776
21:38:42 <Dave> Bob: Proposal close with no action.
21:38:51 <Dave> Bob: Its a breaking change.
21:39:38 <Tom_Rutt> q+
21:39:38 <Dave> Dug: The semantic stays the same, but the name changes.
21:39:50 <BobF> ack dug
21:39:53 <BobF> ack tom
21:40:15 <Dave> Tom: In SCA this did happen. If there is other real important stuff, we will fix this too.
21:40:28 <Zakim> -Tom_Rutt
21:40:30 <dug> q+
21:40:34 <gpilz> q+
21:40:47 <BobF> ack dug
21:41:10 <Zakim> +Tom_Rutt
21:41:12 <BobF> ack gp
21:41:14 <Dave> Dug: There is no real implementation history to protect.
21:41:46 <Dave> Gil: The proposal isn't clear. What is changing, the qname?
21:42:17 <Dave> Dig: The text is OK, but on the wire we send maxelements, but get back elements.
21:43:08 <Dave> Bob: Defer if we do get breaking changes.
21:43:12 <Dave> +1
21:43:43 <Dave> Resolved: Defer this to later if there is another breaking proposal (that matters).
21:44:49 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11723
21:44:56 <Dave> Already closed.
21:45:06 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11724
21:45:26 <Dave> Ram: Needs more time.
21:45:35 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11725
21:45:51 <Dave> Dug: Close with no action.
21:46:05 <Dave> Resolved: Close with no action.
21:46:19 <Dave> Topic: Issue 11772
21:46:37 <Dave> Dug: Straight forwad.
21:47:19 <Dave> Ram: will look into this.
21:47:30 <dug> q+
21:47:36 <Dave> Bob: Well done on the issues.
21:47:50 <Dave> Topic: Testing Scenario
21:47:55 <BobF> ack dug
21:48:21 <Dave> Dug: The NS for the specs and the scenarion are different
21:48:36 <Dave> Dug: Let the scenarion stay in the editor space.
21:48:55 <Dave> Bob: Where would they stay long term?
21:49:14 <Dave> Yves: They would stay in the group's namespace.
21:50:00 <Dave> Bob: Put them in the scenarios directory within the wg.
21:50:07 <dug> now:  http://www.w3.org/2011/01/scenario 
21:50:55 <dug> bob:   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/test
21:51:04 <dug> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/test/scenario.html
21:51:14 <dug> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/test/scenario/Animal.xsd
21:52:08 <Dave> Bob: Yves is this OK?
21:52:12 <Dave> Yves: Yes.
21:52:57 <Dave> Dug: The scenario docs will start differently than teh other specs.
21:53:05 <Dave> Gil: Thsi is oK.
21:53:06 <Yves> if you used an entity for the ns, then it's easy to rebuild and adjust
21:53:20 <dug> well, I need to move it in cvs too
21:53:23 <Dave> Resolved: As proposed.
21:54:11 <Dave> Nothing more on the scenarions.
21:54:11 <li> q+
21:54:27 <BobF> ack li
21:54:32 <Dave> Li: When will these be stable?
21:54:39 <dug> 12:01pm the first day of the f2f
21:54:59 <Dave> Dug: No we still have some more work on eventing.
21:55:35 <Dave> Dug: What is there is pretty stable, But we may add more feature tests.
21:56:10 <Dave> Bob: You can write code now.
21:56:28 <Dave> Li: Is there an actual freeze time.
21:56:45 <Dave> Bob: Can we freeze until the F2F.
21:56:54 <Dave> Bob: it will change at the F2F.
21:57:20 <Dave> bob: Is a week OK?
21:57:57 <Ram> q+
21:58:06 <Dave> Bob: This always happens.
21:58:27 <dug> q+
21:59:01 <Dave> Bob: Some freeze is needed, but will never be stable once we get to the F2F.
21:59:27 <Dave> Bob: We still need to make as few changes as possible as wel approach the F2F.
21:59:30 <gpilz> q+
21:59:32 <Dave> Ram: Agrees.
21:59:36 <BobF> ack ram
22:00:10 <Dave> Ram: Wants a freze date if possible.
22:00:32 <BobF> ack dug
22:01:27 <Dave> Dug: I understand. I hope people are coding to the spec and not the scenario document. This is to test the spec, not the scenarion.
22:01:30 <BobF> Time gentlemen
22:02:13 <Dave> Bob: We will test the spec. and the meeting has ended.
22:02:47 <Dave> Bob: But we will try to be as stable as we can.
22:02:51 <dug> @yves - I hope I said "NOT code for the test"
22:03:24 <Yves> the second time, yes, not the first time :) (but it's late here)
22:03:44 <Zakim> -li
22:03:44 <asoldano> bye
22:03:45 <Zakim> -Gilbert_Pilz
22:03:46 <Zakim> -??P6
22:03:47 <Zakim> -Yves
22:03:47 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
22:03:47 <Zakim> -Doug_Davis
22:03:48 <Zakim> -Bob_Freund
22:03:49 <Zakim> -asoldano
22:03:51 <Zakim> -Tom_Rutt
22:03:53 <BobF> rrsagent, generate minutes
22:03:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/02/01-ws-ra-minutes.html BobF
22:08:50 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, Ashok_Malhotra, in WS_WSRA()3:30PM
22:08:51 <Zakim> WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
22:08:55 <Zakim> Attendees were Bob_Freund, Gilbert_Pilz, +1.908.696.aaaa, Doug_Davis, li, Yves, asoldano, Tom_Rutt, [Microsoft], Ashok_Malhotra
22:17:03 <gpilz> gpilz has left #ws-ra