Notes from the OASIS
WSRF TC
Teleconference
30th October 2006
Agenda
See:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/event.php?event_id=11828
Roll Call
The roll
call is kept on the TC web site under the meeting record.
See
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/event.php?event_id=11828
The
meeting was quorate.
Confirm minute
taker
Tim Banks is taking the
minutes.
Call
for AOB
(Ian) We need to talk
the final state of RMD
(DaveS) That comes
under the RMD item.
New Issues - Chair
(Bryan)
There are no new issues.
(DaveS)
So there is only one issue remaining – that's 117 about a Mex
URI for MRD. And this is resolved
(Kirk)
The decision was that it should be up to the CIM standard.
Close issue list on
RMD - Chair
See
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/download.php/20338/WSRF_IssuesList.doc
(Tim)
There are many issues still in resolved.
(DaveS)
Right, all of these except 177 should be in closed state based on the
approval of the committee draft for public review. 177 should be
closed based on 'No Action' response.
Action
(Bryan) Move all remaining resolved issues to closed.
Suspend TC
activities - Chair
(DaveS)
We agreed a while ago to push RMD to aCommittee spec, so we need the
OASIS admin to organise a ballot.
(Ian)
We need Dan to produce a 'cs' draft of the document.
Action
(Ian) Send email detailing changes required.
(DaveS)
Areyou ok to make the changes, Dan?
(Dan)
Yes.
(Ian)
Also, we should note that we don't need to have statements of intent
to implement because we aren't going as far as OASIS Standards.
However, if people want to send statements
in response to the existing email invitation, that's fine. IBM has an
implementation.
(DaveS)
The situation may change if WS-Mex gets some traction.
Suspend
TC activity.
(Ian)
Once we have delivered all we need to (according to the charter), and
if the TC agrees, we need to tell the admin staff and they can close
the TC.
(DaveS)
Are there any things left to do?
(Bryan)
Well, we have this thing called the 'next issues list' which contains
three issues.
(DaveS)
Ok, let's talk about these.
Issue
WSRF9: Need an API to list all properties including those allowed in
an xsd:any
(IanR)
This goes back to the first face-to-face.
(BryanM)
Resources are going to have metadata. There has to be some other
mechanism to find this information.
(DaveS)
I don't relish restarting work on the finished specs.. also, the OGSA
group have profiled ways to list the qnames of properties in a
document. so procedurally, we should close the issue with no action.
(Bryan)
I'll second that.
(Ian)
Any objections?
None.
Action
(Bryan) Close, no action.
Issue WSRF66:
Discovery of schema for a dynamic resource property
(DaveS)
There is a number of problems here – allowable and present
qnames etc. This is not as well covered by other specs. We can list
the qnames, but not get the schema. The info could be found out from
an extension of the metadata doc. So we could do something, but I
think this not a high enough priority to motivate it.
(IanR)
That would be consistent with the closure of the previous issue.
(TomR)
Is there anyone asking for this?
(IanR)
This referes to the RP spec, but no-one cares about this aspect, or
have found ways around it?
(DaveS)
Yes, basically, the dynamic properties are known to clients by
out-of-band means. It would only be meaningful if we did something
about the previous issue.
(TomR)
Well, the namespace would provide some clues.
(DaveS)
Yes, even if it meant googling for the schema, there are ways to find
it. My recommendation is to close with no action, as there is no
requirement.
(Tom)
Is that a motion?, I'll second it.
(IanR)
Any objections?
None.
Issue WSRF94:
Clarification needed in WS-Resource embodiment for WSDL
(DaveS)
I think we can close this as being superceded, since we've deleted
the section on 'embodiments'.
(Ian)
I agree, I propose that is the resolution.
(Tom)
I second that.
(Dave)
any objections?
None.
(Dave)
Ok, let's get back to suspending the TC activities. Can we agree in
this quorate meeting that we should send an email to the list
proposing suspension, and if we get no objections, we should go
ahead. Does everyone agree to suspend?
(TomR)
I'm not against suspension. What about bug fixes? How would one file
a defect without a TC?
(IanR)
The specs are being used, so defects are possible. If defects were
discovered, we would need to draft a new charter to build new
versions.
(DaveS)
There is a place to put errata based on the original charter.
(TomR)
Yes, but these need to be voted to CS.
(DaveS)
Well, this would require a change to the IPR mode.
(TomR)
So maybe we could keep the TC open (for defects) until the deadline
for IPR changes.That's April 2007.
(DaveS)
So let's send a note proposing to suspend activity on April 15 2007,
and errata must be posted before then.
Action
(Ian) send email to the list.
(IanR)
For RMD, we need to provide info for the ballot.
Action
(Ian) Provide the info.
(Ian)
We need to weed out non-qualifying members to help get the quorum,
but I don't think we need to have another telecon meeting until March
2007 unless the ballot fails.
(TomR)
Or a meeting can be convened via the email list?
(IanR)
Yes. We'll assume any meeting will be in this slot, but we'll assume
it isn't needed until March (to leave a little time in case there are
errata).
(DaveS)
Ok, so that's all!
Straggler Roll Call
See
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/event.php?event_id=11828
Close
Closed
5:35.
Summary
of actions
(Bryan) Move all
remaining resolved issues to closed.
(Ian) Send email
detailing changes required to the pr version of RMD and organize a
ballot to vote on the CS spec for RMD.
(Bryan) Close 'next
issues' issues 9, 66 and 94 with no action.
(Ian) Send email
soliciting objections to suspending TC activity in April 2007.