[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Draft Minutes 16th August Con Call
OASIS WS-CAF Technical Committee Teleconference 16th August 2004 Present Mark Little (Arjuna), Guy Pardon (Atomikos) Joseph M Chiusano (Booz Allen Hamilton), Tony Fletcher & Peter Furniss (Choreology), Eric Newcomer (IONA), John Fuller (Individual), Guy Pardon (Individual), Martin Chapman & Simeon Greene (Oracle), Pete Wenzel (SeeBeyond), Doug Bunting (Sun). Regrets / Leave of Absence: Alastair Green (Choreology) Martin took the roll and the chair. Martin calculated that the meeting was not quorate, but said we would proceed as if the meeting were quorate interpreting the resolutions passed as recommendations to the next quorate meeting. Tony Fletcher agreed to scribe. Agenda There were no comments on the agenda Previous minutes Tony Fletcher proposed and Mark Little seconded the motion that we recommend to the next quorate meeting that the minutes of the teleconference held 2nd August 2004 be approved. There was no discussion and no objection to this motion and therefore it was passed by the meeting. WS-Context Issue 141 by-value, by-reference updating and dereferencing This issue is about updating and dereferencing contexts that are passed by value or by reference. Eric asked if people felt the current text was sufficient. Peter said that he needed to look through the whole document, and apologised that he hadn't but he'd been busy. The text now referred to was in section 3.1. There are implications of propagating by value or by reference. With particular reference to section 3.1 paragraph 3, this text now seems to have lost its context. Not yet clear to the uninformed reader what the differences are of propagating by value and propagating by reference. Peter had offered to write text when this version 0.5 was out, but said he would now be happy to pass this task back to the editors. He was suggesting clarification of the implication of each possibility. Peter said he did not anticipate a change in the answer but just a better explanation of the answer. Action 1: Editors to clarify the implications of, and the differences in propagating, updating and dereferencing contexts by value or by reference. Progression Martin said that he would like to initiate a move of WS-context to committee draft at the next call and so folk have until the next meeting in two weeks' time to raise detailed typographical errors, editorials, etc. If still significant issues on this call then we may need another version (but none were raised). If only editorials, as is the case, then not necessary. Editorials Eric agreed that section 3.1 needs editorial revision, and mentioned that he also had some other editorial points. Eric suggested adding an example of the use of WS-Addressing as well as of WS MessageDelivery now that WS-Addressing had been submitted to the W3C. Martin said he was happy if someone could do it. . Eric said he would volunteer but has computer problems present and is on vacation. Action 2: Eric to provide the WS-Addressing example text by early next week. Martin asked for proposals/proposed edits to be circulated by e-mail. Martin: as a purely editorial item he would like to see more text around the reference specification section. Mention application specifications that reference WS Context. Action 3: Martin to provide a list of things to be covered (plus actual text if possible). Guy: In section 3 the context schema contains ServiceRefType for ‘context-service’ element whereas the following text mentions URI. Does the third section, second bullet of description under Figure 4 apply to a previous version? It mentions URI rather than ServiceReferenceType. Martin section 2.2 talks about the relationship to WSDL. Clarify that WSDL 1.1 must be supported. Action 4: Martin and Eric to provide precise text for section 2.2 that states that WSDL 1.1 shall be supported, at least. Eric mentioned again that he had a few other editorial comments that he promised to type up when he has his computer back. Martin mentioned that the namespace URI needs to be changed to an OASIS one. He suggested using a scheme similar to that used by the OASIS WS-Reliability specification and to include the date of when the specification is actually frozen. Simeon made a motion to adopt this namespace proposal and it was seconded by Peter Furniss. The proposal was passed with no further discussion and no objections. Martin requested that any proposed changes should be in the form of detailed editing instructions, such as change X to Y. If editors concur with the proposed change than they should just do it, otherwise they should raise on e-mail. Eric and Martin mentioned that members of W3C might like to note what was happening in W3C about WS-addressing. AOB Guy mentioned the new OASIS IPR situation and asked if we should discuss today. Martin apologised for not sending out his e-mail on this topic earlier, but as people had not had much time to think about it he proposed to add to the agenda for the next call. Guy replied that he was happy with that. Martin mentioned that on the next call the group should start to talk about WS-Co-ordination Framework. There was no other business and so a motion to adjourn was solicited. Tony responded and made a motion which was approved unanimously. Next Meeting The next meeting scheduled is a regular fortnightly teleconference 30 August 2004 at 8:00 PDT, 11:00 EDT, 16:00 BST, 17:00 CET.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]