[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Raw chat log of 2010-02-25 call
Simon Holdsworth: Audio conference: Meeting Number: * 913929 * (press * before and after the digits) Phone numbers: Austria = Vienna 026822056419 Belgium = Brussels 022901709 China = Beijing 01052237296 Czech Republic = Prague 239014054 Denmark = Copenhagen 32714982 France = Lyon 0426840196 Marseille 0488915310 Paris 0170994364 France TollFree = 0800944795 Germany = Berlin 030726167296 Dusseldorf 021154073845 Frankfurt 069710445413 Hamburg 040809020620 Munich 089244432767 Stuttgart 0711490813212 Germany TollFree = 08006646304 India = Mumbai 02261501417 Ireland = Dublin 014367612 Italy = Milan 0230413007 Rome 06452108288 Turin 01121792100 Japan = Tokyo 0357675037 Netherlands = Amsterdam 0207965349 Poland Toll-free = 008001213648 Portugal Toll Free = 800782079 Russia = Moscow 84999222481 Russia Toll Free = 81080022074011 South Africa Toll-free = 0800982617 Spain = Barcelona 934923140 Madrid 917889793 Sweden = Stockholm 0850520404 Switzerland = Geneva 0225927186 UAE Toll-free = 8000440387 UK = Birmingham 01212604587 London 02071542988 Manchester 01612500379 UK Toll Free = 08003581667 USA = 19543344789 USA & Canada Toll Free = 18665289390 Simon Holdsworth: 1. Opening Introductions Roll call Scribe assignment Top of the scribe list: Plamen Pavlov SAP AG Tom Rutt Fujitsu Limited Anish Karmarkar Oracle Corporation Ashok Malhotra Oracle Corporation Martin Chapman Oracle Corporation David Booz IBM Eric Johnson TIBCO Software Inc. Laurent Domenech TIBCO Software Inc. Bryan Aupperle IBM Agenda bashing 2. Approval of the minutes from 11th February: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/36498/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202010-02-18.doc 3. Actions 20090211-4 [General] Write up HTTP binding use cases 20090709-2 [Editors] Update the WS binding schema appendix title to include 1.1 20091015-3 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #1 - review and determine appropriate update to copyright dates (all specs) 20091015-4 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #2 - clarify the text describing the JCA binding (JCA only) 20091015-5 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #3 - revise text to reword or remove as appropriate (JCA only) 20091015-7 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #6 - clean up the text with regards to this item (JCA only) 20091015-8 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #8 - look at whether the non-normative references section is relevant still, or needs to be populated (all specs) 20091015-9 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #9 - clean up naming conventions section (all specs) 20091015-10 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #10 - look for cleanup to clarify optionality (all specs) 20091015-11 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #11 - do something to clarify the different uses for the @uri attribute (JCA only) 20091015-12 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #16 - mark Annexes as normative or not as appropriate (all specs) 20100218-1 [Editors] Make corresponding changes in JMS spec as per http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200912/msg00013.html 20100218-2 [Editors] Make corresponding changes in WS spec as per http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200912/msg00013.html 20100218-3 [Editors] Make corresponding changes in JMS spec as per http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201002/msg00033.html 4. New Issues http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-118 BWS40005 is ambiguous http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-120 Missing normative statements for JCA @uri http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-121 Missing normative statements for binding.jca inboundOperation http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-122 Missing normative statements for binding.jca outboundInteraction http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-123 Missing normative statements for @type attributes http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-124 (?) No conformance statement for SCA WS Callback Protocol (not currently in JIRA) 5. Discuss proposed TC schedule 25th February: Resolve/close out existing issues (87, 111, 11 4th March: Initial discussion on test case documents and test cases; bindings specs updated and ready for review for cd04; 11th March: cd04 vote on bindings specs; continue discussion on test cases; TA documents updated and ready for review for cd01; 18th March: cd01 vote on TA documents; Initial test case documents and test cases prepared for discussion/review 25th March: Submit cd04 of bindings specs for second public review; submit cd01 of TA documents for public review 6. Test Assertions/Test cases Current status: Overall: Awaiting current set of issues to be resolved and applied, at which point editors will need to update TA docs and then we can review them with the aim of getting to CD. Web Service binding TA document: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/34571/sca-wsbinding-1.1-test-assertions-wd02.odt http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/34572/sca-wsbinding-1.1-test-assertions-wd02.pdf Status: Draft completed and issues raised; needs to be updated for resolved issues JMS TA document: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/36374/sca-jmsbinding-1.1-test-assertions-wd05.doc http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/36375/sca-jmsbinding-1.1-test-assertions-wd05.pdf Status: Needs to be updated for resolved issues JCA TA document: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/36155/sca-jcabinding-1.1-test-assertions-wd04.doc http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/36156/sca-jcabinding-1.1-test-assertions-wd04.pdf Comment: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200909/msg00011.html Status: Needs to be updated for resolved issues 7. Open issue discussion Public review comment issues: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-87 Web Service callback standard is best done by the appropriate Web Services working groups Raiser: PR comment, owner: Unassigned Priority: 1 (PR comment needing disposition) Status: latest email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200911/msg00001.html Other open issues: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-111 binding.jms uses JMS URI scheme even though it is not a valid IETF internet draft Raiser: Eric Johnson, owner: Unassigned Priority: Unassigned Status: Pending response from Oracle with respect to approval of the IETF draft http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-60 JMS Default wire format insufficient to cover real world usage Raiser: Mike Edwards, owner: Simon Holdsworth Priority: 3 (deferred) Status: outline proposal in issue 8. AOB anish: Scribe: Anish Karmarkar anish: ScribeNick: anish anish: Topic: Agenda reiview anish: No comments. Agenda Approved anish: Topic: Approval of minutes anish: Resolution: minutes of 2010-02-11 call located at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/36498/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202010-02-18.doc approved anish: Topic: AI Review anish: 20091015-3 [Editors] Re: BINDINGS-99 point #1 - review and determine appropriate update to copyright dates (all specs) DONE, nothing to do anish: 20091015-4 20091015-5 & 20091015-7 are DONE anish: 20091015-8, 20091015-9, 20091015-10 are done for JMS and JCA, still pending for WS binding anish: 20091015-11 is DONE anish: 20100218-1 and 20100218-3 are DONE anish: Rest are PENDING anish: Topic: new issue 118 anish: Motion: Dave moves, Anish seconds to open issue 118 anish: motion approved w/o anish: Resolution: Issue 118 is now open anish: Topic: new issue 120 anish: Simon: 120-123 are similar and came out of the ed. AI anish: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-120 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-121 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-122 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-123 anish: The issues are about the fact that there is no normative behavior specified anish: Motion: anish moves Bryan seconds to open issue 120 anish: Motion: anish moves Bryan seconds to open issue 120 Dave Booz pings anish ping anish: Motion: anish moves Bryan seconds to open issue 120 anish: motion approved w/o anish: Resolution: issue 120 is open anish: Topic: New issue 121 anish: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-121 anish: simon explains the issue anish: motion: dave moves bryan seconds to open issue 121 anish: motion approved w/o anish: Resolution: issue 121 is open anish: Topic: new issue 122 anish: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-122 anish: Simon explains issue 122 anish: motion: mike moves bryan seconds to open issue 122 anish: motion approved w/o anish: Resolution: issue 122 is open anish: Topic: new issue 123 anish: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-123 anish: Simon explains issue 123 anish: motion: mike moves bryan seconds to open issue 123 anish: motion approved w/o anish: Resolution: issue 123 is open anish: Topic: Discuss proposed TC schedule anish: 25th February: Resolve/close out existing issues (87, 111, 11 4th March: Initial discussion on test case documents and test cases; bindings specs updated and ready for review for cd04; 11th March: cd04 vote on bindings specs; continue discussion on test cases; TA documents updated and ready for review for cd01; 18th March: cd01 vote on TA documents; Initial test case documents and test cases prepared for discussion/review 25th March: Submit cd04 of bindings specs for second public review; submit cd01 of TA documents for public review anish: anish: TA review may raise issues that may result in CD05 before PR anish: Bryan: not sure if there is a point in doing TA review without test cases anish: Dave: agree anish: simon: in that case, what is a reasonable time frame for test cases Eric Johnson: (aside: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-124 has been logged) anish: Mike: how many normative statement are there? anish: Simon: don't know anish: Mike: my guess is that it'll take a month anish: Mike: don't see a problem for JMS and WS binding anish: ... for JCA we don't have an impl, so don't know how to test the test cases anish: anish: do we want to do a PR of the spec before the test cases are done? anish: mike: we are not obliged to do another PR, if the changes are substantial anish: Simon: the changes are substantial anish: mike: so we need another PR, the question of whether to delay the 2nd PR is interesting. For assembly, the changes from test cases were not substantial anish: Dave: for java the number of issues out of test cases is no more than handful anish: Byran: same for c/c++. We did discover duplicate normative stmts. Mostly clarification. anish: Dave: didn't introduce new functions, just clarifying normative stmts and addition of non-normative stmt anish: Mike: so doesn't look like the test cases throw up a lot of changes anish: Simon: given this discussion it seems like it makes sense to take the binding specs thru 2nd PR anish: ... I'll update the proposed schedule based on this discussion anish: Topic: new issue 124 anish: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-124 anish: anish explains the issue anish: Simon: the title of the issue is not right anish: ... there is a conformance stmt just that not for the right target anish: Mike: am puzzled as to what we need to say, section 5 already has normative stmts anish: anish: looking for a target for the protocol and something like a section 6.3 that lists the stmts that one MUST implement etc anish: Mike: dont' know what that would buy us. Martin C: why are there normative statements if something cant comply to it anish: anish: it helps in assigning blame, if something goes wrong Martin C: something like an SCA Compatible Client? anish: anish: important from an interop story anish: eric: we have been over this before, but the TC is not interested in having a stand along spec. We are are only interested in SCA runtimes anish: Martin: we do have special cases where things outside the domain is sca-aware. This will come in handy for federation (which is out of scope) Eric Johnson: (I also mentioned that we'd have to define a new conformance target in order to satisfy the notion behind this new issue) anish: Dave: section 5 has bunch of stmt that say "SCA runtime" MUST do something or the other, what would you do to fix this? Simon Holdsworth lowered your hand Tom Rutt: Anish wants to abstract the conformance target for the callback protocol and then make sca runtime a real use of this abstract target anish: anish: don't want to split the spec and make it stand alone, that is more of a formatting issue/optics issue -- which I like -- but this is about creating appropriate targets with good conformance criteria anish: anish: wrt Dave's question, i would not have the same statements twice, but create targets for the protocol and say that in case of SCA runtime it is acting in that target's role anish: Eric: dont' think abstract is easy, you'll have to state more things like must use SOAP, ws-i profiles etc anish: Anish to send an updated title for the issue
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]