OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Full agenda for 6/14 (monday) teleconf

the full agenda is attached, along with the new open issues, and links 
to email discussions.

Tom Rutt

Since the Draft is not ready, we will not be able to vote on a new CD at 
this meeting.

Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133

Title: Draft Agenda to WSRM TC Conference Call – May 06, 2003

Full Agenda of WSRM TC Conference Call –June 14, 2004


The meeting of the WSRM TC  will take place by teleconference 

Monday, June 14, 2004, from 5:30 to 7:30 PM Eastern Standard Time



Conference Bridge number
Toll only : 1-512-225-3050
Participant code: 716071



1         Draft Agenda:

Draft Agenda to WSRM TC Conference Call

1 Roll Call

2 Minutes Discussion

2.1 Appointment of Minute Taker

2.2 Approval of previous meeting minutes –

3 Action Item Status Review

4 Discussions of unresolved comments

5 Discussion of Document progression

6 Scheduled Vote for CD (not likely)

7 Scheduled Vote to Submit to OASIS for member vote (not likely)

6 Discussion of FAQ for WS-Reliability


2         Roll Call



 Meeting  ??  quorate.


3         Minutes Discussion

3.1      Appointment of Minute Taker

Tom Rutt will take minutes.


Minutes will serve to record issue resolutions.

3.2      Approval of previous meeting minutes

The minutes of the June 08 teleconf are posted at:



4         Status of Action Items


4.1      Action 052503-1 (Tom Rutt) pending

Tom took an action item to complete the status column of 
pre public review issues list, with correct URLs.


4.2      Action 060104-5 (Jacques) Pending


Action: Jacques, will propose further edits, on the FAQ for composability.



4.3      Action 060804-1 (Doug Bunting) closed


Action: Doug will propose text for  in 4.5 to clarify that when you cannot deliver due to rm fault, then send back a soap fault,


Complete, Text incorporated in 1.01I


4.4      Action 060804-2 (Jacques) closed

Jacques took an  action to describe the response reply pattern to work with our abstract model to sneak around to allow response correlation, and how it can be used for duplicate elimination. 


Jacques provided as contribution 1.01J.


Need further discussion with new technical issues PC 24 and 25



5         Discussion of Issues and editorial Comments

The following issues list includes items which need further discussion:



5.1      Approval of Outstanding Editorial Comments Reflected in 1.01I


The following editorial comments need to be formally approved, to apply the agreed edits within 1.01I  to become a new Editor’s draft 1.02.




5.1.1      PC 16





Agreed not yet applied to draft

Sunil Kunisetty


Title: Namespaces and Schema location

Description: Need to change namespaces of our schemata to be the same as URL for final location on OASIS server. Also, may need to revisit the use of version 1.1 in our namespace as a _direictory_.Oasis has given us a document directory http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrmWS security followed the convention of year and month.

Proposal: Re: [wsrm] Action Item status as of 6/3/04 From Sunil Kunisetty All namespaces qualified with both year/month and filename with 1.1 included in name

Resolution: Proposal agreed at June 08 meeting, incorporated in 1.01I



5.1.2      PC20





Agreed in principal not yet applied to working draft

Tom Rutt


Title: Editorial Cleanup

Description: Edits proposed in Detailed Editorial Fixes for Sections 1 - 4 of ED 1.01 andEditorial changes for Sections 5 onward to Draft 1.01

Proposal: accept all proposed edits with following exceptions agreed at 6/08/04 meeting: line 231: Do not add proposed definition for reply publishing, but instead to add new defintion to 1.01 text for publish as folows:"PublishAn abstract operation making an rm-reply available to its destination.For the various rm-reply patterns this entails:_ response reply pattern : publishing the reply requires sending the rm-reply on the response of the underlying transport protocol._ callback reply pattern: publishing the reply requires sending a callback message including the RM-reply information. _ poll reply pattern: publishing the reply requires making the RM-Reply information available to be returned to the sender in response to a poll request"Lines 961 thru LInes 965:At the 6/08 meeting it was agreed to change the second bullet. Doug B provided the following text for the second bulle in proposed wording for bullet in 4.5, Doug Bunting"When the Response RM-Reply Pattern is in use and the message cannot be delivered to the Consumer, the underlying protocol response MUST contain a SOAP Fault (in the SOAP Body) in addition to the appropriate RM Fault (in the SOAP Header). The sending RMP and producer expect either a complete response or a SOAP Fault when using the Response RM-Reply Pattern and this equirement satisfies those expectations. More details are given in the HTTP Binding section."Also: lines 949-951change the following sentence:"These protocol specific fault codes arereturned by the Receiving RMP within the response header element. Reliable Message Faults are carried in the SOAP Header, and do not rely on the SOAP Fault model for the following reasons:"to"These protocol specific fault codes are returned by the Receiving RMP within the response header element. Reliable Message Faults are carried in the SOAP Header, and do not rely exclusively on the SOAP Fault model for the following reasons:"Also:Lines 1273, 1339, 1421:Leave the following text from 1.01 as is: _due to a failure in processing the RM headers_

Resolution: Agreed in principal , included in 1.01I



5.1.3      PC21





Agreed in principla not yet in working draft

Jacques Durand


Title: Editorial corrections to 1.01

Description: Re: [wsrm] editorial comments on 101, J Durand

Proposal: Accept all of Jacques edits , with following change proposed for the introduction paragraph to Table 26:"This specification supports Reliable Messaging capabilities for WSDL 1.1 [WSDL 1.1] One-way and Request-response operation types only. While a Request-Reponse operation can use any of the three RM-Reply patterns to receive acknowledgments or faults, a One-way operation SHOULD (for WS-I BP 1.0 conformance) only use either Callback or Poll RM-Reply pattern. Table 26 indicates recommended usage of reply patterns, for two WSDL operaton typed. An RMP MUST, at leat, support the recommended combinations in Table 26, for the reply patterns it supports. However, an RMP is not requried to disinguish WSDL operation types."

Resolution: Applied to draft 1.01I, not yet applied to Working Draft



5.1.4      PC22





Agreed in principle, not yet applied to working draft

Mark Peel


Title: Editorial comments on 1.01


Proposal: All comments except the one on Line 629 was applied to editing draft 1.01I. Full sentence is allowed to be introduced by Note: prefix in specifications. Also removing redundant "@foo attribute" to become "@foo" throughout.

Resolution: not yet in Working Draft



5.1.5      PC23





Agreed in principle, not yet applied to working draft

Tony Graham


Title: Editorial comments from Tony Graham

Description: Re: [wsrm] 1.1-1.02 editorial

Proposal: Agree to proposal, include in editing draft 1.01I

Resolution: Not Yet applied to working draft



5.2      PC24






Doug Bunting


Title: Payload inclusion and MEPs other than request/response

Description: Re: more on payload(s) inclusion and MEPs than our Request-ResponseMEP discussion covers

Proposal: under discussion



·  Summary of WS-Reliability 1.01* issues discussed over past week
From Doug Bunting <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM> on
13 Jun 2004 22:10:30 -0000


·  RE: [wsrm] Summary of WS-Reliability 1.01* issues discussed over past week
From Jacques Durand <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com> on
14 Jun 2004 03:26:10 -0000


5.3      PC25






Doug Bunting


Title: Duplicate message responses

Description: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200406/msg00078.html

Proposal: under discussion



·  RE: [wsrm] clarification on Respond primitive
From Jacques Durand <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com> on
14 Jun 2004 06:19:04 -0000


6         Discussion of Document Progression.


For discussion


1         Potential Vote for CD progression


Draft Not ready, due to new issues


2         Potential Vote for OASIS Submission for Member vote of CD


Draft no Ready, due to new issues


3         Frequently Asked Questions


Tom posted the following:


·  Approved FAQ set for WSRM TC
From Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com> on 3 Jun 2004 13:57:21 -0000


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]