[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [ws-dd] Thursday, September 18 - F2F Notes
|
Thursday,
September 18, 2008 There are now 65 issues that have been submitted as of the start
of the meeting today. Motion: 2nd
F2F should be held Dec 2nd to 4th – no objections Where should it be held? People are looking into options
– Canon is checking Motion: 3rd
F2F should be held Feb 3rd to 5 – no objections Audio Conferences: Is
next Tuesday too early for next call? Is it better Sept 30th?
– no objections Next Teleconference is Sept 30th – at 8 am PT Back to Issues Issue 17: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00039.html Issue 17: Moved to Active
– no objections It could be complicated to address. Issue is not just size but avoiding complexity AI: Dan and Antoine to
discuss and propose resolution Issue 58: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00085.html Issue 58: Moved to Active
– no objections This may be related to the multi-home issue. This clarifies what is there, but it may be revisited for
multi-home issue. Proposal Accepted Issue 58: Moved to
Pending - editors assigned to change– no objections Issue 25: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00049.html How do you relate device
types and service types? Issue 25: Moved to Active
– no objections Need machine readable format
to describe this. No solution has been
proposed. We will wait for a concrete proposal to solve this. Issue 59: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00086.html Issue 59: Moved to Active
– no objections Change to WSDL not the wire AI: Vipul to investigate
if proposal is the correct way to proceed. Issue 56: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00082.html Issue 56: Moved to Active – no objections Related to Issue 52. What is the cost of
implementing this? Need a discussion and
presentation on what this would look like. WS-Man does this in a simple
way – maybe we could go for this subset of XPath? We need to be careful about
light weight devices. Perhaps we could make something
optional AI: we need proposals and
contributions for this Issue 61: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00088.html Issue 61: Moved to Active – no objections Guidelines for backwards
compatibility with older versions? Can we publish such a thing? Perhaps submit as separate
issue? Proposal Accepted Issue 61: Moved to
Pending - editors assigned to change– no objections Issue 42: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00066.html Issue 42: Moved to Active – no objections Requirement for long lived
connections We need to focus on interop. No resolution. AI: Antoine: provide a proposal. Others free to provide contributions. Issue 66: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00093.html Issue 66: Moved to Active – no objections Remove RelationType attribute
– not required. Proposal Accepted Issue 66: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to change– no
objections Issue 57: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00083.html Issue 25 also covers this
issue. This is a comment and additional information on Issue 25. Issue 57: Marked as a duplicate – no objections Issue 26: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00050.html Issue 26: Leave in review – no objections AI: Antoine to provide information as to if it can be done within the
context of DPWS Issue 62: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00089.html Issue 62: Moved to Active – no objections Proposal Accepted Issue 62: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to change– no
objections Issue 28: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00052.html Issue 28: Moved to Active – no objections Proposal to reduce to 2500 ms
Accepted Issue 28: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to change– no
objections Issue 63: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00090.html Issue 63: Moved to Active – no objections Proposal Accepted Issue 63: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to change– no
objections Issue 29: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00053.html Issue 29: Moved to Active – no objections There is no solution
proposed. AI: Antoine should provide a proposal. Issue 60: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00087.html Issue 60: Mark as duplicate of 66. Revisit Issue 59: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00086.html Other specs use this
convention Proposal Accepted Issue 59: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to change– no
objections Issue 64: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00091.html Issue 64: Moved to Active – no objections Proposal Accepted Issue 64: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to write text – no
objections AI: Dan and Antoine to look at DPWS and if there is an issue then they
will submit an issue Issue Raised by Gottfried. Naming conventions: His proposal, for discussion, is
to use the following URI (by example for html – other formats differ in
the file extension only): ·
This version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-dd/soap-over-udp/1.0/wd01/soap-over-udp-20080916.html ·
Latest
version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-dd/soap-over-udp/1.0/soap-over-udp.html After much discussion we have
settled on this format. Here are some examples: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-dd/dpws/1.0/wd-01/wsdd-dpws-1.0-schema-wd-01.xsd http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-dd/soapoverudp/1.0/wd-01/wsdd-soapoverudp-1.0-spec-wd-01.docx http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-dd/soapoverudp/1.1/os/wsdd-soapoverudp-1.1-spec-os.docx AI: Chairs create directory structure and create RDDL doc at
appropriate place. AI: Editors to apply this naming recommendation. Issue 30: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00055.html Issue 30: Moved to Active – no objections AI: Everybody think about it. Issue 65: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00092.html Issue 65: Moved to Active – no objections Proposal Accepted Issue 65: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to write text – no
objections Revisiting Issue 49: Additional text required Line 321. Discovery proxy is
an optional component of the network and may not always be available. AI: Editors make this change. Issue 31: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00054.html Should BP 2.0 be in scope?
It supports SOAP 1.2. Issue 31: Moved to Accept – no objections Issue 31: Moved to Deferred – no objections BP 2.0 is not yet available.
We need to wait to see what happens here. Issue 38: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00062.html Issue 38: Moved to Accept – no objections A clarification makes sense. We need to get language. Answer to this depends on
answer to Issue 37 Issue 37: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00061.html Issue 37: Moved to Accept – no objections Show an example of using the
extensibility point to show scopes. Maybe in the white paper? AI: Dan + Antoine work on resolution. Anyone interested in editing
the White Paper? Is it the same as a Pimer? François and Alain will lead the white paper editing and others will
help as needed. Chair: When do we want
interop? Could we do interop at second
F2F? Need CD1 about a month to 6
weeks before. Can we get first CD by mid
October? Yes – Aim would be to get CD1 cut by mid October Do we have all the key issues
on the table? It would seem so yes. The major one is the
“managed cluster” – 5 issues. Which issues need to get into
CD1? Only one issue will cause a
change request/response. AI: All submitters - identify issues that require potential changes to
implementation. AI: All companies – identify issues that are important to CD1. CD ballot is a full majority
ballot. Plan is to have CD ballot on call on Oct 14th. Finish tech issues by Oct 7th. Editor’s draft would be
useful as soon as possible to cover issues we have already resolved. If we have interop at
December meeting that would become an issue for the host. Should we have interop and TC
F2F co-located? Who would prefer same week?
Most people… Who would prefer a different
week? AI: Chair - Need to pose this question via emailto other members of TC About 6-7 companies
interested in interop in December? Schneider,
Windows, Canon, Ricoh, SAG maybe, FX maybe, .NET There may be external parties
coming to interop? There are issues to having
external parties involved. It is normally only TC members. IPR issues. Potential Hosts of second F2F need to consider it might be a 4 day
event. Will also need extra room for interop. Issue 39: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00063.html Issue 39: Moved to Accept – no objections Does spec allow recursive
hosting of services? Kind of. UPnP allows infinite levels. Keep at potentially recursive
but advise people not to use it? AI: Antoine + Dan to discuss this and propose a clarification Issue 40:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00064.html Issue 40: Moved to Accept – no objections URL could also be in both
locations. Then you have to figure out
what to do if you had conflicting entries. Open for further discussion Issue 41: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00067.html Issue 41: Moved to Accept – no objections Linked to changing to new
WS-Addressing reference (Issue 7). Becomes part of WS-Addressing
cluster of issues Issue 43: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00068.html Issue 43: Moved to Accept – no objections AI: Antoine to propose change Issue 67: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00094.html Issue 67: Moved to Accept – no objections Also add “…if not
present SHA-1…” Proposal Accepted Issue 67: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to write text – no
objections Issue 45: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00071.html Issue 45: Moved to Accept – no objections Proposal Accepted Issue 45: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to write text – no
objection Issue 68: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00095.html Issue 68: Moved to Accept – no objections We should use xml:id Proposal Accepted Issue 68: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to write text – no
objection Issue 46: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00072.html Issue 46: Moved to Accept – no objections Proposal Accepted Issue 46: Moved to Pending - editors assigned to write text – no
objection Issue 69: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00096.html Issue 69: Moved to Accept – no objections AI: Vipul to propose new solution Issue 53: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-dd/200809/msg00079.html Issue 53: Moved to Accept – no objections Requirement: Managed mode
client to be informed of new devices. We have identified the issue. Open to resolutions. It is probably not good to
have a dependency on Eventing. All the submitted issues have
been discussed. Meeting and F2F is adjourned |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]