[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrp-wsia] Minutes for 27 February 2003 Meeting
I think we said 9AM PST/12PM EST/6PM CET with a duration of 1h. Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards, Richard Jacob ______________________________________________________ IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888 Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com |---------+----------------------------> | | Alejandro | | | Abdelnur | | | <alejandro.abdeln| | | ur@sun.com> | | | | | | 02/28/2003 05:42 | | | AM | |---------+----------------------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: | | cc: WSRP <wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org> | | Subject: Re: [wsrp-wsia] Minutes for 27 February 2003 Meeting | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| yes on #142 The conf call on Tuesday at 8AM PST clashes with JSR168 regular conference call. This is a conflict for Subbu, Chris, Mike, Andre and myself. Alejandro Danny Machak wrote: >Meeting started at 9:06 PST > >An attempt to start the meeting at 8:00 AM PST failed due to a lack >of a quorum. > >==================================================================== >The minutes were accepted from the meeting last Thursday, 2/20/03 >The Tuesday meeting on 2/25/03 was cancelled due to a lack of a >quorum. > >==================================================================== >Roll Call > >Voting Members: >------------------- >Alejandro Abdelnur Sun no >Sasha Aickin Plumtree no >Subbu Allamaraju BEA yes >Olin Atkinson Novell yes >Atul Batra Sun yes >Amir Blich SAP yes >Chris Braun Novell yes >Rex Brooks Starbourne yes >T.J. Cox Novell no >William Cox BEA no >Brian Dirking Stellent no >Michael Freedman Oracle yes >Ross Fubini Plumtree yes >Richard Jacob IBM yes >Jon Klein Reed-Elsevier yes >Andre Kramer Citrix yes >Alan Kropp Vignette Corporation yes >Carsten Leue IBM yes >Dan Machak Tibco yes >Madoka Mitsuoka Fujitsu yes >Adam Nolan Reed-Elsevier yes >Sunit Randhawa Fujitsu no >Nigel Ratcliffe Factiva no >Eilon Reshef WebCollage no >Joe Rudnicki U.S. Navy no >Gennady Shumaker SAP yes >Yossi Tamari SAP Portals no >Gil Tayar WebCollage no >Rich Thompson IBM yes >Eric van Lydegraf Kinzan no >Michael Young Plumtree no >Charles Wiecha IBM yes > >Total voting members: 32 >Voting members in attendance: 19 (59%) >A quorum was present. > > >Members on Leave Of Absence >---------------------------- >Monica Martin Drake Certivo LOA >Petr Palas Moravia IT LOA >Raj Ramesh CommerceOne LOA >Thomas Schaeck IBM LOA >Steven Smith Capitol College LOA > >WSIA Members in attendance (non-voting) >--------------------------------------- >Bruce Lucas IBM yes > > >==================================================================== >Summary of Change Requests: > >167 ? Correct mime types ACCEPTED >171 ? Make RegistrationState field use explicit. ACCEPTED >172 ? explicitly useCachedMarkup ACCEPTED >142 ? Remove performInteraction()? TIE VOTE >147 ? Exposes Registration portType or req registration?: ACCEPTED >170 ? Producer providing UserCategory support for Portlets ACCEPTED >169 ? Is resourceName usage a conformance statement? ACCEPTED >153 ? Make resourceName optional? ACCEPTED >151 ? UserScope definition ACCEPTED >155 ? Resending UserContext semantics ACCEPTED >174 ? Processing a new cacheControl ACCEPTED >156 ? Reset + set properties semantics ACCEPTED >144 ? Meaning of requiresRegistration field ACCEPTED >158 ? ServiceDescription.locales definition Treated as Change > Bar in >spec > >==================================================================== >Small editorial/grammar changes (I do not expect to walk through >these unless there are objections): >167 ? Correct mime types > Section 5.1.10 / Page 19 / Line 36 > Use actual mime types in example rather than common acronyms >171 ? Make RegistrationState field use explicit. > Sections 5.1.19 & 5.1.20 / Page 24 / Lines 2 & 21 > Title says it all >172 ? explicitly useCachedMarkup > Section 6.1.10 / Page 31 / Line 40-42 > By being explicit, the conformance statement can > stand on its own > >Resolution: Accepted without comment > >==================================================================== > 142 ? Remove performInteraction()? > Impacts many sections > JSR168 has dropped the need for this operation. Do we >still want to keep it? Basic trade-off is the additional >functionality vs the additional complexity for understanding, >implementing and testing. > >Arguments for removing: reduction in complexity >Arguments against removing: already defined. Semantics are useful. > >Resolution: Tie vote 9 for removing, 9 for keeping, 1 abstain > >Vote outcome: > >Subbu Allamaraju BEA yes >Olin Atkinson Novell abstain >Atul Batra Sun yes >Amir Blich SAP no >Chris Braun Novell yes >Rex Brooks Starbourne no >Michael Freedman Oracle no >Ross Fubini Plumtree yes >Richard Jacob IBM yes >Jon Klein Reed-Elsevier no >Andre Kramer Citrix no >Alan Kropp Vignette Corporation no >Carsten Leue IBM yes >Dan Machak Tibco yes >Madoka Mitsuoka Fujitsu no >Adam Nolan Reed-Elsevier no >Gennady Shumaker SAP no >Rich Thompson IBM yes >Charles Wiecha IBM yes > >A yes vote means that performInteraction would be removed. > >==================================================================== > 147 ? Exposes Registration portType or requires registration? > Section 3.5 / Page 11 / Line 34-35 > Proposal is to change a conformance statement from exposing >the in-band technique for registering to the use of the >requiresRegistration flag. > >Resolution: Accepted - Will drop sentence entirely > >==================================================================== > 170 ? Producer providing UserCategory support for Portlets > Section 5.1.1 / Page 20 / Line 4-5 > Proposal is to drop the conformance level language from >the note that the Producer may actually provide this support on >behalf of the Portlet. > >Resolution: Accepted - Will drop sentence entirely > >==================================================================== > 169 ? Is resourceName usage a conformance statement? > Section 5.1.5 / Page 17 / Line 19-20 > Question is the value of making the use of resourceName >as an indirection in a ResouceList a conformance statement. Proposal >is to keep the content, but not as a conformance statement. > >Resolution: Accepted - Will drop conformance language. > >==================================================================== > 153 ? Make resourceName optional? > Section 5.1.5 / Page 17 / Line 23 > Proposal is to have semantics for not supplying a >resourceName (namely that values for other locales are not supplied). > >Resolution: Accepted > >==================================================================== > 151 ? UserScope definition > Section 5.1.11 / Page 19 / Line 19-20 + others > Proposal change UserScope from a tri-value to an open-ended >set with 2 predefined values. This drops the needs to use the >extensions field just to carry the name of other semantics. > >Resolution: Accepted: UserScope field changed to type String. > Define Strings for the 2 pre-defined scopes. This > will be modelled more like modes and window-states. > >==================================================================== > 155 ? Resending UserContext semantics > Section 5.1.11 / Page 20 / Line 29 > Proposal is to clarify the semantics of new information being >supplied for either UserContext or Templates. > >Resolution: Approved. Semantics should be that new info > replaces the old. > >==================================================================== > 174 ? Processing a new cacheControl > Section 6.1.10 / Page 31 / Line 40-42 > Be explicit when useCachedMarkup is "true" and a new >CacheControl is supplied, it replaces the previous one. > >Resolution: Approved. Semantics should be that new info > replaces the old. > >==================================================================== > 156 ? Reset + set properties semantics > Section 5.1.14 / Page 21 / Line 37 > Proposal is for clear semantics when a property is >included in both the reset and set arrays of a PropertyList. > >First question is whether it is necessary to define any >semantics on how to handle properties in both arrays, or to >enforce the two arrays to be mutually exclusive. > >Resolution: Approved. Arrays are mutually exclusive. > Producer will throw a fault. > >==================================================================== > 144 ? Meaning of requiresRegistration field > Section 5.1.18 / Page 23 / Line 17 > Proposal is for a new conformance statement for when >requiresRegistration='true'. > >Resolution: Approved. > >==================================================================== > 158 ? ServiceDescription.locales definition > Section 5.1.18 / Page 23 / Line 29 > Proposal seeks to clarify that not all LocalizedStrings >will have values for all locales. > >Resolution: Rich will update the language. > >==================================================================== > > >There will be 2 teleconferences next week: > >Tuesday, March 4 > 8:00 am PST / 11:00 am EST / 5:00 pm CET > duration: 1 hour > >Thursday March 6 > 8:00 am PST / 11:00 am EST / 5:00 pm CET > duration: 2 hours > > >==================================================================== >Meeting adjournded at 10:05 PST > > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC