Simon Holdsworth: Audio conference:
Meeting Number: * 913929 * (press * before and after the digits)
Phone numbers:
Austria = Vienna 026822056419
Belgium = Brussels 022901709
China Toll Free = China North 108007121722, China South 108001201722
Denmark = Copenhagen 32714982
France = Paris 0170994364, Lyon 0426840196, Marseilles 0488915310
Germany = Berlin 030726167296, Frankfurt 069710445413, Hamburg 040809020620, Munich 089244432767, Stuttgart 0711490813212, Dusseldorf 021154073845
India Toll Free = 0008001006703
Ireland = Dublin 014367612
Italy = Milan 0230413007, Rome 06452108288, Turin 01121792100
Japan = Tokyo 0357675037
Netherlands = Amsterdam 0207965349
Portugal = Lisbon 211200415
Russia Toll Free = 81080022074011
Spain = Barcelona: 934923140, Madrid: 917889793
Sweden = Stockholm 0850520404
Switzerland = Geneva 0225927186
UK Toll Free = 08003581667
UK Toll = London 02071542988, Manchester 01612500379, Birmingham 01212604587
USA Toll Free = 18665289390
USA Toll = 19543344789
Simon Holdsworth: 1. Opening
Introductions
Roll call
Scribe assignment
Top 10 on the scribe list:
Nimish Hathalia TIBCO Software Inc.
Plamen Pavlov SAP AG
Anish Karmarkar Oracle Corporation
Piotr Przybylski IBM
Eric Johnson TIBCO Software Inc.
Simon Nash Individual
David Booz IBM
Ashok Malhotra Oracle Corporation
Bryan Aupperle IBM
Martin Chapman Oracle Corporation
Agenda bashing
2. Approval of the minutes from 5th March
(approval for minutes of 11th March held over to next call)
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/31622/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202009-03-05.doc
3. Actions
20090211-4 [General] Write up HTTP binding use cases
20090226-1 [Simon Nash] Propose resolution for BINDINGS-23
20090226-2 [Anish Karmarkar] Propose resolution for BINDINGS-25; depends on BINDINGS-54
20090226-4 [Eric Johnson] Propose resolution for BINDINGS-43
20090226-7 [Simon Holdsworth] Propose resolution for BINDINGS-60
20090305-1 [Eric Johnson] Update proposal for BINDINGS-54
20090311-1 [Simon Holdsworth] Diff the updated schemas to see what Mike E changed to see if issues need raising.
20090311-2 [Edtors] Update specs for new assembly namespace
20090311-3 [Simon Holdsworth] Check with Issues Editor on closing issues that are applied in CD02 or earlier
20090311-4 [Simon Holdsworth] Submit a new proposal for BINDINGS-39
4. XSD updates
As per email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00057.html
5. New Issues
Please note, as per resolution on 9th October 2008, new issues received on the mailing list after Noon GMT 1st November can only be opened using the same voting rules as re-opening a closed issue (2/3 majority of a full TC vote)
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-68
Invalid schema provided by sca-binding-jms-1.1-cd02.xsd
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-69
Both Binding-JCA and Binding-JMS schemas define"{http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca/200903}CreateResource"
6. Open Issue Summary/Schedule
Discuss ownership/deferral of issues.
Current schedule:
Public review drafts to be completed by 5th March, with TC vote on 12th March
Test assertions complete by end of March, test cases by end of April
Issues with proposed resolutions: 6
Issues with identified owner, no resolution: 2
Issues with no identified owner: 0
Survey outlook for issues with no proposed resolution (marked with * in this list)
Simon Holdsworth: 39, 48, 60*
Eric Johnson: 43, 54
Anish Karmarkar: 2, 25
Simon Nash: 23*
7. Open Issue Discussion
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-43
Update binding.ws spec for wireFormat/operationSelection elements
Raiser: Simon Holdsworth, owner: Eric Johnson
Status: Proposed resolution: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00048.html
Latest email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00062.html
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-54
Endpoint URI algorithm is unclear
Raiser: Eric Johnson, owner: Eric Johnson
Status: Proposed resolution: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00045.html
Latest email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00060.html
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-2
How should SCA callback semantics be carried over Web Services?
Raiser: Simon Nash, owner: Anish Karmarkar
Status: Proposed resolution: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200902/msg00126.html
Latest email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00015.html
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-25
Is it required that every implementation of binding.ws support the soap intent?
Raiser: Anish Karmarkar, owner: Anish Karmarkar
Status: Proposed resolution in email http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00049.html
Latest email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00051.html
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-23
@wsdlElement definition needs clarification on "equivalent" and use of WSDL 2.0 constructs
Raiser: Eric Johnson, owner: Simon Nash
Status: Specific resolution text required
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-39
JMS callback specification does not cater for callbacks using other bindings
Raiser: Simon Holdsworth, owner Simon Holdsworth
Status: Updated proposed resolution: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00058.html
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-48
How are mayProvide intents on bindings satisfied
Raiser: Ashok Malhotra, owner: Simon Holdsworth
Status: Proposed resolution: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00005.html
Latest email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200903/msg00059.html
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-60
JMS Default wire format insufficient to cover real world usage
Raiser: Simon Holdsworth, owner: Simon Holdsworth
Status: No proposal
8. AOB
-------------------------------------------------------------------
*Revolving list of scribes*
Nimish Hathalia TIBCO Software Inc.
Plamen Pavlov SAP AG
Anish Karmarkar Oracle Corporation
Piotr Przybylski IBM
Eric Johnson TIBCO Software Inc.
Simon Nash Individual
David Booz IBM
Ashok Malhotra Oracle Corporation
Bryan Aupperle IBM
Martin Chapman Oracle Corporation
Eric Johnson: Scribe: Eric
Eric Johnson: (No quorum as yet)
Eric Johnson: Topic: Action items
Eric Johnson: 20090226-2 Completed - proposal on mailing list.
Eric Johnson: 20090226-4 Completed - proposal on mailing list.
Eric Johnson: 20090305-1 completed -proposal on mailing list.
Eric Johnson: 20090311-1 - completed
Eric Johnson: 20090311-3 - completed
Eric Johnson: 20090311-4 - completed
Eric Johnson: Topic: approval of the minutes
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Any objections to approving the minutes?
Eric Johnson: (No objections, minutes are approved.)
Eric Johnson: Topic: Review of XSD changes by Simon
Eric Johnson: Eric moves that we make the changes from the email as an action item.
Eric Johnson: Dave B. seconds.
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Any objections to unanimous consent?
Eric Johnson: (No objections, motion passed.)
Eric Johnson: Eric: Should we have two issues or one issue for bindings 69?
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Will almost certainly result in changes to both.
Eric Johnson: Eric: Action item for me to open a second issue, then.
Eric Johnson: Topic: Open issues
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Request to look at bindings-39 first.
Eric Johnson: (no objections.)
Eric Johnson: Subtopic: bindings-39
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Posted an updated resolution to add a couple of sentences (see email)
Eric Johnson: Dave: Should it be "MAY" - is "can" appropriate?
Eric Johnson: Simon H
utting "can" in is fine.
Eric Johnson: Simon N:Nothing to do with JMS binding, shouldn't be normative.
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Anyone prepared to resolve the issue?
Eric Johnson: Simon N:Small nit, "this section and its subsection" - will need to be reworded for when we pull conformance statements out.
Eric Johnson: Simon N: Move to accept Simon H's proposal as resolution of issue 39, with the substitution of "can" for MAY.
Eric Johnson: Bryan seconds.
Eric Johnson: Simon H: any objections to unanimous consent?
Eric Johnson: (No objections, motion passed, issue 39 resolved.)
Eric Johnson: Subtopic: Issue 43
Dave Booz thanks Eric for genning the pdf
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Any comments?
Eric Johnson: Eric: Move that we resolve issue 43 with the proposal #2 in the email just posted.
Eric Johnson: Simon N: Second.
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Any objection to unanimous consent.
Eric Johnson: (No objections, motion passed, issue resolved.)
Eric Johnson: Subtopic: Issue 54
Eric Johnson: Eric walks through proposal.
Eric Johnson: Dave: First sentence - runtime URIs, but the runtime "SHOULD" honor. But the "MUST" formulation of the steps makes this "should" confusing.
Eric Johnson: Eric: The order of the rules is a "MUST", but the output is something that "SHOULD" be respected.
Eric Johnson: Dave: Need to fix the wording....
Eric Johnson: Simon N: Wonder if it would be much clearer if the SHOULD should come after all the rules.
Eric Johnson: ... find a binding URI. If the runtime can honor, it does, but if it doesn't, it raises an error.
Eric Johnson: Dave: Shouldn't be talking about "absolute URIs". The whole result is then treated with the "should".
Eric Johnson: Eric: One point - if no matching ports, then raise an error.
Eric Johnson: Simon N: Yes - get a URI (or URIs), then apply how the runtime "should" treat it.
Eric Johnson: Simon N: Few more points sent by email....
Eric Johnson: ... Strike first comment if we move the "should" to the end.
Eric Johnson: ... item #2 - need URI(s) construction since there could be multiple.
Eric Johnson: ... item #3 - need to reconsider.
Eric Johnson: ... what if you point at a WSDL binding, we consider that an error?
Eric Johnson: ... if that's the case, then step #4 should be "raise an error."
Eric Johnson: Eric: If we do that, are we being repetitive with normative statements?
Eric Johnson: Simon N: For clarity, assembly doesn't go into the detail. If you've got both specs in front of you, you might figure it out, but without that, you could miss it.
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Sympathize with Simon.
Eric Johnson: ... In the reference case, you don't have an otherwise case.
Eric Johnson: Eric: No problem with additional clarity, but do we need a normative statement?
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Yes - normative statement is useful.
Eric Johnson: Eric: Happy to add the additional normative statement at the end.
Eric Johnson: Action: Eric to revise proposal again.
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Any other topics?
Eric Johnson: Simon N: Normal call schedule next week?
Eric Johnson: Simon H: Yes.
Eric Johnson: Meeting adjourned