[wsrp-wsia] Minutes for1 January 2003 Meeting

[Richard Jacob <richard.jacob@de.ibm.com>]

Hi Members,

Roll Call attached as am HTML file.
Please let me know if I missed someone.

(See attached file: RollCall0114.htm)

No quorum reached.
Therefor discussion around the open issues.

#197
Clarification about the usage of the tokens.
Proposed resolution: add wsrp-SessionID, wsrp-portletInstanceKey and
wsrp-userContextID

#194
Discussion about whether password should be in there. Andre pointed out
that it might mean that credentials should be provided (somehow).
Richard stated that these should be left to the security TCs.
Agreement to not add password.
Mike asked why specify DIME and SOAPAttachments, these are defined by the
bindings.
Andre that these are currently not supported by the stacks, therefor it
might be helpfull.
Mike: But we did say, that we use naming conventions for the bindings to
indicate that.
General agreement.
Proposed resolution:
Add a non-normativ appendix if time allows, gather the list items by email.

#198
Proposed resolution: The concepts are orthogonal, thus a Portlat can claim
to have no user specific state turn around but later clone_on_write.

#199
Proposed resolution:
1.) preffered title use is optional, consumer's choice to show or not to
show things.
2.) preffered title must match the locale of the markup
3.) no just a string, as it is the dynamic title for the current markup

#191
Mike: did we consider markup to be binary in general?
Rich: it should be less expensive to send it as string.
Mike: spliting into two fields seems "ugly"
Rich: mapps well to the stacks -> send binary data as attachments
Richard: this is only true for DIME, not for MIME attachments
Andre: it doesn't cost us on the wire, no additional information would be
sent.
Richard: we would need additional semantics to state that both fields are
mutual exlusive because <choice> is not supported by the stacks.
Proposd resolution: continue to investigate, discuss on thursday

#200
Rich: binary OK for registrationState and portletState. Others might be
pushed to the client, therefor should remain strings
General Agreement.
Proposed resolution: change both fields to binary, leave the others strings

#201:
No one had strong reasons for changing the names as they don't really
improve the understanding of the semantics.
Rich: need to make sure in the spec to make this clear.
Proposed resolution: no name change, clarify in the spec.

#202:
Bruce: it would be very convenient to have inline schema transport in that
case. Why don't we define <any> to transport the schema?
General discussion about pros/cons.
Proposed resolution: schema inlining seems to be sufficient for a lot of
cases. Maybe we should give it a try to transport via <any> inline.

#???/1
Proposed resoultution: no objection to move

#???/2
Proposed resolution: element seems to be preffered.


Please correct me if I missed something.

Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,

        Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469  -  Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com

Voting Members	14-Jan
Abdelnur, Alejandro
Aickin, Sasha
Allamaraju, Subbu
Atkinson, Olin
Blich, Amir
Braun, Chris
Brooks, Rex	y
Cox, T.J.
Cox, William
Dirking, Brian
Drye, Stephen	on leave of absence
Filicetti, Gino	on leave of absence
Freedman, Michael	y
Jacob, Richard	y
Klein, Jon
Kramer, Andre	y
Kropp, Alan
Leue, Carsten
Machak, Dan
Martin, Monica
Mitsuoka, Madoka
Nolan, Adam
Palas, Petr	y
Ramesh, Raj
Randhawa, Sunit
Ratcliffe, Nigel
Reshef, Eilon
Rudnicki, Joe	y
Schaeck, Thomas	y
Shumaker, Gennady
Smith, Steven
Tamari, Yossi	y
Tayar, Gil
Thompson, Rich	y
van Lydegraf, Eric	y
Young, Michael	y
Wiecha, Charles	y
Prospective Members (non-voting)
Fubini, Ross	y
Non-voting Members
Dynin, Jane
Stanko, Joseph
WSIA Members              (non-voting)
Konuru, Ravi	y
Lucas, Bruce	y
Riddell, Graeme