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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrp message

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

Subject: [WSRP] minutes of WSRP TC conf call 27/01

Title: [WSRP] minutes of WSRP TC conf call 27/01

Minutes of WSRP TC conf call 27/01/2005

Andre Kramer

Rich took the meeting roster separately but I note we failed to reach quorum (9 versus 12). So minutes of previous meeting still to be approved...

Atul volunteered to be the WSRP secretary until the next face to face meeting (see below).

Only the Interfaces SC meet since the last TC call: The call last Wednesday reviewed Richard's CCPP proposal which he has updated to capture the discussion. This (http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp-interfaces/download.php/11106/CCPP-support-draft03.html) will be discussed again next Wednesday. The other topic for the call will be CSS classes. Rich will send out some new candidate classes for 2.0 (derived from IBM product experience) and requests that all TC members canvas their teams for other proposals based on our 1.0 classes. As an aside: the expectation is that these will be covered by a future JSR (Java Specification Request), as for other new WSRP 2.0 features.

Other SCs:

Andre reported on W3C binary optimizations becoming W3C recommendations (email sent to wsrp-webservice).

We will ask WSDL SC members to attend following the next full TC call to more fully discuss the various WSDL testing that has been in progress (the problems with the current Axis 1.2 release candidate were mentioned briefly).


Clinton sent out a new version containing corrections and some new additions (include how to generate stubs using various tools). A few questions remain unanswered (FQUA?). Microsoft volunteered to supply the "How do Web Parts relate to WSRP?" text.


Subbu outlined #309 which proposes to make extension processing lax. While some concern/unease remains, this does seem the best practical and most common way to specify extensions in XML Schema. [However, this is making the assumption that the extensions are in fact optional. My opinion is that a private schema contract can still be used when a consumer & producer require extensions to be supplied.]

The current rev of the 2.0 spec is still at 0.4 but Rich expects to integrate more features soon. No issues have been closed recently and issue owners are asked to review and progress their issues.

Other Items:

Rex reported on liaison activity (WAS TC).

Rich has the ok for the 3 day TC meeting at the April symposium (http://www.oasis-open.org/events/symposium_2005/) from OASIS.

Rich clients were briefly raised by Clinton and the consensus was that more should be done in this area. 1.0 Resources and Events will help (as does the 1.0 ability to tunnel any markup type) however, involvement of content definers/users would be great!

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