RE: Minutes, 18 January 2007 WS Description WG telcon
"Jonathan Marsh" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.services.description |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <000501c73dec$06f3b6c0$d901640a@DELLICIOUS> |
Corrected minutes: Updated attendance, resolution markup, certain attributions, various editorial. Thanks for the comments! Jonathan Marsh - <http://www.wso2.com> http://www.wso2.com - <http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 12:05 AM To: 'www-ws-desc' Subject: Minutes, 18 January 2007 WS Description WG telcon Enclosed. Jonathan Marsh - <http://www.wso2.com> http://www.wso2.com - <http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
20070118-ws-desc-minutes.html
(text/html, 22 KB)
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html lang='en' xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
<head>
<meta name="generator" content=
"HTML Tidy for Linux/x86 (vers 12 April 2005), see www.w3.org" />
<title>WS Description WG telcon -- 18 Jan 2007</title>
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href=
"http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/base.css" />
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href=
"http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/public.css" />
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href=
"http://www.w3.org/2004/02/minutes-style.css" />
<meta content="WS Description WG telcon" name="Title" />
<meta content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" http-equiv=
"Content-Type" />
</head>
<body>
<p><a href="http://www.w3.org/"><img src=
"http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" alt="W3C" border="0" height=
"48" width="72" /></a></p>
<h1>WS Description WG telcon</h1>
<h2>18 Jan 2007</h2>
<p>See also: <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2007/01/18-ws-desc-irc">IRC log</a></p>
<h2><a name="attendees" id="attendees">Attendees</a></h2>
<div class="intro">
<dl>
<dt>Present</dt>
<dd>Allen Brookes, Rogue Wave Software</dd>
<dd>Roberto Chinnici, Sun Microsystems</dd>
<dd>Youenn Fablet, Canon</dd>
<dd>Amelia Lewis, TIBCO</dd>
<dd>Philippe Le Hegaret, W3C</dd>
<dd>Jonathan Marsh, Co-chair/WSO2</dd>
<dd>Jean-Jacques Moreau, Canon</dd>
<dd>Gilbert Pilz, BEA Systems</dd>
<dd>Tony Rogers, Co-chair/Computer Associates</dd>
<dd>John Kaputin, IBM (for Arthur)</dd>
<dt>Regrets</dt>
<dd>Charlton Baretto, Adobe Systems</dd>
<dd>Paul Downey, British Telecommunications</dd>
<dd>Jacek Kopecky, DERI Innsbruck at the Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck, Austria</dd>
<dd>Arthur Ryman, IBM</dd>
<dt>Chair</dt>
<dd>Jonathan</dd>
<dt>Scribe</dt>
<dd>gpilz</dd>
</dl>
</div>
<h2>Contents</h2>
<ul>
<li>
<a href="#agenda">Topics</a>
<ol>
<li><a href="#item01">Implementer's call</a></li>
<li><a href="#item02">minutes</a></li>
<li><a href="#item03">action items</a></li>
<li><a href="#item04">administrivia</a></li>
<li><a href="#item05">CR130</a></li>
<li><a href="#item06">CR118</a></li>
<li><a href="#item07">CR123</a></li>
<li><a href="#item08">CR124</a></li>
<li><a href="#item09">CR125</a></li>
<li><a href="#item10">CR126</a></li>
<li><a href="#item11">CR127</a></li>
<li><a href="#item12">CR128</a></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><a href="#ActionSummary">Summary of Action Items</a></li>
</ul>
<hr />
<div class="meeting">
<h3 id="item01">Implementer's call</h3>
<p class='irc'><<cite>jkaputin</cite>> Look's like I'm
showing as Jeremy Hughes today instead of Roland Merick</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh2</cite>> <a href=
"http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/results-messages/MessageTest-1G/log-MessageTest1G-canon-canon-results.html#message1">
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/results-messages/MessageTest-1G/log-MessageTest1G-canon-canon-results.html#message1</a></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Jonathan</cite>> <test
id="MessageTest-6G" binding="SOAP12"></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Jonathan</cite>> <log
client="wso2" service="wso2" id="MessageTeest-6G-wso2-wso2"</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Jonathan</cite>>
>MessageTest-6G/log-MessageTest6G-wso2-wso2-output.xml</log></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Jonathan</cite>> </test></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Jonathan</cite>> <log
client="wso2" service="wso2"
id="ModuleComposition-1G-wso2-wso2"</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Jonathan</cite>>
>ModuleComposition-1G/log-ModuleComposition1G-wso2-wso2-output.xml</log></p><a name="action01"
id="action01"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Jonathan</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Jonathan to factor multipart out of
MessageTest-2G [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2007/01/18-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01">http://www.w3.org/2007/01/18-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01</a>]</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>>
/home/plehegar/dev/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/results-messages/build.xml:195:
input file
/home/plehegar/dev/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/documents/good/MessageTest-6G/SOAPservice.wsdl
does not exist</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>> hum, did you forget to
add this file in cvs Jonathan?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>> <a href=
"http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/results-messages/Message-tests-results.html">
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/results-messages/Message-tests-results.html</a></p>
<p class='phone'>scribe gpilz</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>> scribe: gpilz</p>
<h3 id="item02">minutes</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>UNKNOWN_SPEAKER:</cite> approved</p>
<h3 id="item03">action items</h3>
<pre>Review of Action items [.1].
[Interop]
? 2006-11-30: [interop] John Kaputin to create a test case
with "required=false".
? 2006-12-14: [interop] Jonathan to fix transferCodings -
add control group
[WG]
? 2006-09-21: Jonathan to check periodically that SPARQL has
added schemaLocation.
? 2006-12-14: plh to come up with a more detailed proposal for
CR112 if possible
DONE 2007-01-04: Jonathan to make sure parameters are added to the
URI in the HTTP binding even when no whttp:location
appears.
? 2007-01-04: Paul to report back on which test cases in the
WSDL test suite fail the basic patterns, with
suggestions on how to address the issues.
? 2007-01-04: Jonathan to analyze CR117 further.
DONE [.3, .4, .5] 2007-01-11: Jonathan to send WS-Policy comments to the
WS-Policy WG
? 2007-01-11: Jean-Jacques to provide more analysis on how
difficult it would be deal with a Policy that
only contains an MTOM policy assertion
DONE [.6] 2007-01-11: Philippe to propose a grammar for http:location
Current Editorial Action Items
Note: Editorial AIs associated with LC issues recorded at [.2].
[.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/#actions
[.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/actions_owner.html
[.3] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4211
[.4] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4211
[.5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Jan/0105.html
[.6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Jan/0088.html</pre>
<p class='phone'><cite>UNKNOWN_SPEAKER:</cite> Phillipe posted
his proposed grammar</p>
<h3 id="item04">administrivia</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>UNKNOWN_SPEAKER:</cite> Mostly defered
items</p>
<h3 id="item05">CR130</h3>
<p class='phone'>Phillipe has proposed a grammar</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>> httpLocation ::=
CharData? (( openBrace | closeBrace | elementName )
CharData?)*</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>> CharData ::= [^{}]*</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>> openBrace ::= '{{'</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>> closeBrace ::= '}}'</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>> elementName ::= '{'
NCName '}'</p>
<p class='phone'>John Kaputin: Grammar seems ok to me.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Everybody ok with
this?</p>
<p class='phone'><strong class='resolution'>Resolution: Close CR130 with this
proposal (mod change proposed by Jonathan and reference to XML
spec (?))</strong></p>
<h3 id="item06">CR118</h3>
<p class='phone'><a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR118">http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR118</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> (reviews issue)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Phillipe:</cite> Is the schema
normative?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Yes.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Roberto:</cite> (missed his point)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> If you're a WSDL 2.0
implementation and you provide an API that allows you to build
a component model at some point you need to validate that
model.<br />
... If the only way you can do this is via schema validation,
that means you need to generate the infoset then run it through
a validating parser.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Roberto:</cite> agrees</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Phillipe:</cite> Also, removing these
two assertions basically remove them from peoples
understanding. The assertions exist in the schema but that's
the only place you would see them.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> Not really sufficient to
simply describe the assertions in the schema.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Are you concluding that
the endpoints are not constrained to be unique?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> Its not sufficient to
express this constraint solely in the schema.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> The assertion failure
will never be reported by schema validation alone since the XML
doc will fail during validation!</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> We don't have all the
assertions that are implemented by the schema reflected in the
spec. We should be consistent and remove the first
assertion.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Phillipe:</cite> We should be
consistent.<br />
... If there is a general rule, we should state what it is.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> I agree that we should be
consistent.<br />
... If there is a WSDL 2.0 API that allows you to build up the
component model programatically, is there a way to validate
w/out serializing then parsing?<br />
... Not if you take these assertions out.<br />
... The idea of having assertions implemented via schema works
fine if you always start from a WSDL 2.0 document.<br />
... Suppose, instead, you start with some WSDL 2.0 authoring
tool. You build up the descritpion component, by component.
What happens when you want to validate<br />
... your component model. If you remove these assertions then
it is possible (likely) that these constraints will be missed
unless the ONLY way of validating<br />
... is to serialize the component model as a WSDL 2.0 document
and run it through a validating parser.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> This is an artifact of
the way we test WSDL 2.0 assertions. We always start with a
WSDL 2.0 document then run it through a parser. These
assertions can never be<br />
... violated using that process since the document will fail
schema validation before you ever get to checking
assertions.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> If you rely on schema
validation to report errors, the same error may be reported in
different ways depending upon what parser you are using.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> If we remove the
asssertion markup from these statements . . .</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> There are others as well .
.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> If we continue to write
test cases we will find other assertions for which we cannot
write test cases.<br />
... We could also simply review the specs and try to find
more.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>alewis</cite>> is our schema
normative?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> How do you write test cases
to violate the rules in the schema if some/most of those rules
aren't expressed as assertions?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> We don't. All of our
test cases start from well-formed, schema-valid documents.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> Should we raise an issue to
read the spec looking for assertions that violate schema?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Yes, but we need to
find a volunteer (outlines scope of work)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> I'm not sure if the green
tests in the coverage report can be ignored.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> The green tests mean
that Lawerence was able to write a WSDL that passed schema
validation and violated the assertion.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> But Woden doesn't
necessarily stop when schema validation fails.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> But Lawernce doesn't
check in the test case if it fails schema validation.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> Ah. So that leaves some 60
assertions to check.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> I suggest we fix the
ones we know about and fix others as we find them.<br />
... We just need to remove the "assertion" markup.<br />
... Don't think it would be the end of the world if we remove
the assertion markup.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> Endpoint-0065,
InterfaceFault-0032, InterfaceOperation--0035<br />
... What about Interface--0030?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> No this isn't because
its refering to an interface from another document.<br />
... Both documents could be schema-valid but combined they
would validate the assertion.</p>
<p class='phone'><strong class='resolution'>Resolution: Remove assertion markup from
Endpoint-0065, InterfaceFault-0032,
InterfaceOperation--0035</strong></p>
<h3 id="item07">CR123</h3>
<p class='phone'><a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR123">http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR123</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> This is one of
Youenn's</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Youenn:</cite> (reviews the issue)</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>plh</cite>> <a href=
"http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#_http_binding_default_rule_method">
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#_http_binding_default_rule_method</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> If safety is not engaged,
couldn't it be GET or POST?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Youenn:</cite> In the HTTP binding there
are rules to tell you whether to use GET or POST.<br />
... The safety extension is pretty cheap. We should state that
generally, when you engage the HTTP binding you should also
enage the safety extension.<br />
... Woden and Canon both implement both of these so there isn't
a problem.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> So we just have a
statement when we introduce the HTTP binding saying that
supporting the safety extension is a pre-condition to
supporting the HTTP binding?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Youenn:</cite> Yes.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Yoenn:</cite> When we use the SOAP
binding with HTTP extensions, what is the effect (if any) on
the safety extension?<br />
... Do we also mandate support of the safety extension?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> I would say no because
the HTTP method property is not a property of the SOAP
binding.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> (clarifies)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Phillipe:</cite> What happens in the
case of the SOAP response MEP when SOAP is using HTTP?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> The SOAP response MEP,
when bound to HTTP, must use a GET.</p>
<p class='phone'><strong class='resolution'>Resolution: Close CR123 by
adopting Youenn's proposal.</strong></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> Was the proposal we just
adopted about mandating the use of safety if binding type is
HTTP? It looks like its already mandatory?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Right now its an
extension and all extensions are optional.</p>
<h3 id="item08">CR124</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> This one is already
done.</p>
<p class='phone'><strong class='resolution'>Resolution: Close with editorial
actions that have already occured.</strong></p>
<h3 id="item09">CR125</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> This one looks
editorial. The pattern attribute is always required. We need to
fix the misleading "defaulting" language.</p>
<p class='phone'>Amy: Didn't Arthur fix this already?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Could be. The end
result is the same.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> That means taking out the
"otherwise" bit in the ???</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Amy:</cite> The idea was that we weren't
going to require people to explicity put the attribute in.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>JonathanMarsh</cite>> Proposal:
<a href=
"http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Dec/0038.html">
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Dec/0038.html</a></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>JonathanMarsh</cite>> + add ? to
the pseudo-syntax.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>JonathanMarsh</cite>> + change the
schema</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>JonathanMarsh</cite>> + change the
interchange format</p>
<p class='phone'><strong class='resolution'>Resolution: Close CR125 by
adopting Amy's proposal mod the above changes.</strong></p>
<h3 id="item10">CR126</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> (reviews issue)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> Do we have any other
statements like this which talk about the document as a
whole?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> I think we do.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>TonyR</cite>> <strong class='resolution'>RESOLUTION: close
CR126 with the proposal in the issue</strong></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> For example
Schema-0018</p>
<h3 id="item11">CR127</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>Youenn:</cite> (reviews issue)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Related to CR134.
They're pretty much the same thing. I have a proposal for
CR134.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> Could you review CR134?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> (reviews CR134)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> So the proposal is to add
advice to the primer?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Yes. We've discussed
this at length.<br />
... Is this a sufficient proposal for CR127?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Youenn:</cite> Yes. I also think that it
might be good if Woden was able to warn people when such
situations may occur.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> That would be useful.
You might want to consider that as a product feature.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> You could turn this into a
warning assertion.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> We've had sufficient
debate around adding normative text around operation dispatch.
We don't want to go there . . .<br />
... This proposal matches the behavior you get "out of the box"
with the HTTP binding</p>
<p class='phone'><strong class='resolution'>RESOLUTION: Close
issues CR127 and CR134 with Jonthan's proposal for
CR134</strong></p>
<h3 id="item12">CR128</h3>
<p class='phone'><a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR128">http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR128</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Roberto:</cite> The last sentence in the
issue doesn't seem to relate to the previous exposition.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> The implied question is how
interface extension works.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Jonathan:</cite> Arthur already replied
to Cindy.<br />
... There are really two questions; does "extension" including
things extended by the thing you extended? The other question
is about the use<br />
... multiple extends attribute.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>John:</cite> We could fix the first by
changing the wording to "extends directly or indirectly"</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>jkaputin</cite>> The set of
operations available in an interface includes all the
operations</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>jkaputin</cite>> defined by the
interfaces it extends directly or indirectly, together with any
operations it directly</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>jkaputin</cite>> defines</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>jkaputin</cite>> The set of
operations available in an interface includes all the
operations</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>jkaputin</cite>> defined by the
interfaces it extends directly or indirectly, together with any
operations it directly</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>jkaputin</cite>> defines</p>
<p class='phone'><strong class='resolution'>RESOLUTION: Close
CR128 with above changes</strong></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>jkaputin</cite>> clarify visibility
of schema components and ensure the spec is clear</p>
</div>
<h2><a name="ActionSummary" id="ActionSummary">Summary of Action
Items</a></h2><!-- Action Items -->
<strong>[NEW]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Jonathan to
factor multipart out of MessageTest-2G [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2007/01/18-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01">http://www.w3.org/2007/01/18-ws-desc-minutes.html#action01</a>]<br />
<br />
[End of minutes]<br />
<hr />
<address>
Minutes formatted by David Booth's <a href=
"http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm">
scribe.perl</a> version 1.127 (<a href=
"http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/">CVS log</a>)<br />
$Date: 2007/01/18 17:42:23 $
</address>
</body>
</html>