<asir> i'll join at 5 minutes past the hour

<fsasaki> scribe: frederick

<maryann> thanks felix

<fsasaki> scribeNick: fjh2

administrative

<maryann> asir, are you joining by phone?

<maryann> are you on mute, perhaps?

<asir> am dialing in

Next week Asir will chair, Maryann with be reporter, and Maryann will be scribe

Action Items

Ignore ticklers, 100 and 216

these are ongoing, change date to 31 June

AI 223

<fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy-eds/2007Apr/0012.html

<fjh4> actions 223 and 224 done

<asir> Felix, thank you for making the doc look pretty with rectangle annotated boxes

AI 227

<fjh4> toufic: these are done, possible confusion of section numbering

<fjh4> also for 228

<fjh4> question for David Orchard

<fjh4> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.xml.diff?r1=1.54&r2=1.55&f=h

<toufic> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#assertion-target

<fjh4> asir: note that the restructuring has not been done, it is simply the tags adjustment.

<fjh4> ... so the model has not been applied yet.

<fjh4> fjh4: look at red-line, link above

<fjh4> maryann: toufic still needs to restructure the sections to follow the model

<fjh4> ... actions are still open

<fjh4> I propose we add an editors action to reflect the WG action to have an editors plan for interop document

<asir> related WG action is http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicy/actions/277

<fjh4> yes, also wanted an agenda item.

Actions 227, 228

<fjh4> still open for toufic, targeting 25th.

AI 229

<fjh4> maryann: still open, working on local build

AI 230

<fjh4> asir: still open, planning for next week.

<fjh4> maryann: extend date to 25th

231

<fjh4> fjh4: still open, extend to 25

232

<fjh4> prasad: extend to 25th

233 and 234

<fjh4> Need to confirm whether this restructuring is done

<toufic> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#extending-assertions

<fjh4> s;Need;maryann: Need

<fjh4> maryann: ok

<fjh4> maryann: ok

<fjh4> maryann: toufic you can look at this for an example

<fjh4> asir: here is response to Dave O (email)

<asir> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy-eds/2007Apr/0047.html

<fjh4> maryann: before closing these AIs need to see response to asir's mail

<fjh4> ... toufic to send message to David regarding these issues

<fjh4> asir: referring to good practice 12

<fjh4> maryann: ok to not have an example

<fjh4> asir: this is an exception, go case by case

AI 235

<fjh4> Plan to release version of scenarios by 1 May

<fjh4> asir: same as WG action 277

<fjh4> maryann: title not clear

<fjh4> asir: need stable version of interop document in advance so implementers can prepare for interop

<fjh4> asir: document should always be up to date, unless we have open issues against it

<fjh4> ... 236 and 237 are only two against it. I've completed 236. 237 is open.

<fjh4> maryann: looking for volunteer for 237

<fjh4> toufic: I will take issue 237

<fjh4> s/takes/I will take

<fjh4> maryann: is there a way to create mail with summary of changes

<fjh4> asir: change log in document, toufic should update it

<fjh4> ... first page has auto timestamp at front

<fjh4> ... action 235, on 1 May need to tag and release

<fjh4> asir: I can tag and release, give date of 31 April

<fjh4> ... can report next week that version of document coming through, status of one action

<fjh4> toufic: due dte for 237 so asir has at least 5 days to tag etc

Plan to document changes to guidelines

<fjh4> maryann: some things are done, some in progress, some new things

<fjh4> ... asir do you have list of items not assigned, new good practices?

<asir> G2) An assertion author should define policy assertions for behaviors that are relevant to compatibility tests, such as web service protocols that manifest on the wire.

<asir> G7) An assertion description should use the wsp:Optional attribute to indicate that the behavior indicated by the QName is optional for the associated policy subject.

<asir> G8) An assertion XML outline should allow the use of the wsp:Optional attribute to indicate optional behaviors.

<asir> G9) An assertion description should use the wsp:Ignorable attribute to indicate that the behavior indicated by the QName may be ignored by policy intersection.

<asir> G10) An assertion XML outline should allow for the use of the wsp:Ignorable attribute to indicate ignorable behaviors.

<asir> G11) An assertion author should represent useful (or additional) information necessary for engaging the behavior represented by a policy assertion as assertion parameters.

<asir> G16) An assertion author should choose the most granular policy subject that the behavior (represented by a policy assertion) applies to.

<asir> G17) If an assertion is allowed to be associated with multiple policy subjects then the assertion description should describe the semantics of multiple instances of the same assertion attached to multiple policy subjects at the same time.

<asir> G18) An assertion author should specify a preferred attachment point for the chosen policy subject.

<fjh4> maryann: do we need action item for each

<fjh4> asir: perhaps consider grouping first

<fjh4> ... some already have section in document

<asir> the contribution is at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Mar/att-0069/good-practices-4-assertion-authors-03-05-2007.pdf

<prasad> +1 to the first approach

<fjh4> asir: agrees to review these items and determine which sections they belong in, if no existing section indicate new section needed

<fjh4> maryann: this is correct

<fjh4> ... plan to report to wg, still on track for F2F, identified sections with owners, and task to review remaining practices and determine location. Owner of section will complete those.

<fjh4> ... editors will have to provide text outlining changes to allow us to create summary

<fjh4> asir: diff will not be very useful due to number of changes, summary better

<fjh4> maryann: I will take action to document plan and report to WG.

<fjh4> asir: what about timeline?

<fjh4> maryann: F2F is 23 May, need all edits done by 16 May.

<fjh4> ... will include timeline in plan and share first on editorial list

<fjh4> ACTION: asir review remaining practices and determine which sections they belong in, if no existing section indicate new section needed [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-ws-policy-eds-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-238 - Review remaining practices and determine which sections they belong in, if no existing section indicate new section needed [on Asir Vedamuthu - due 2007-04-25].

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128  of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/July/June/
Succeeded: s/takes/I will take/
FAILED: s/takes/I will take/
Found Scribe: frederick
Found ScribeNick: fjh2
Present: Prasad

WARNING: Fewer than 3 people found for Present list!

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy-eds/2007Apr/0058.html
Got date from IRC log name: 18 Apr 2007
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-ws-policy-eds-minutes.html
People with action items: asir

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.