19:10:22 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
19:10:22 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/06/23-ws-ra-irc
19:10:24 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:10:24 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ws-ra
19:10:26 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WSRA
19:10:26 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 20 minutes
19:10:27 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
19:10:27 <trackbot> Date: 23 June 2009
19:21:33 <Geoff> Geoff has joined #ws-ra
19:25:45 <Bob> Bob has joined #ws-ra
19:27:42 <Bob> test
19:28:00 <Zakim> WS_WSRA()3:30PM has now started
19:28:06 <Zakim> +??P3
19:28:06 <Bob> trackbot, start telecon
19:28:08 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:28:10 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WSRA
19:28:10 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM already started
19:28:11 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
19:28:11 <trackbot> Date: 23 June 2009
19:28:31 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
19:28:38 <Zakim> +Bob_Freund
19:28:59 <asir> asir has joined #ws-ra
19:29:08 <Zakim> + +91.98.49.99.aaaa
19:29:30 <Zakim> -??P3
19:29:35 <dug> dug has joined #ws-ra
19:29:38 <Ram> Ram has joined #ws-ra
19:30:01 <Bob> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jun/
19:30:15 <Zakim> +Doug_Davis
19:30:19 <Zakim> +??P8
19:30:31 <Zakim> +Gilbert
19:30:53 <Bob> zakim, ??P8 is Paul
19:30:53 <Zakim> +Paul; got it
19:31:20 <Asir2> Asir2 has joined #ws-ra
19:31:20 <Yves> Yves has changed the topic to: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jun/ 
19:31:26 <Vikas> Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:31:47 <gpilz> gpilz has joined #ws-ra
19:32:01 <Bob> regrets+ Ashok
19:32:09 <Zakim> +Vikas
19:32:12 <Wu> Wu has joined #ws-ra
19:32:32 <Bob> zakim, [Micro is Asir
19:32:32 <Zakim> +Asir; got it
19:32:43 <Bob> zakim, Asir has Ram
19:32:43 <Zakim> +Ram; got it
19:32:52 <Bob> zakim, Asir has Geoff
19:32:52 <Zakim> +Geoff; got it
19:32:54 <Zakim> +Wu_Chou
19:33:04 <Zakim> +Yves
19:33:15 <Bob> Zakim, Wu has Li
19:33:15 <Zakim> +Li; got it
19:34:23 <Bob> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jun/0050.html
19:34:38 <fmaciel> fmaciel has joined #ws-ra
19:35:19 <Bob> scribe: Paul Nolan
19:35:28 <Bob> scribenick: Paul
19:36:16 <li> li has joined #ws-ra
19:37:06 <Paul> Geoff: should we eximine vacation plans?
19:37:31 <Paul> Agenda agreed
19:38:10 <Paul> No objections to approving all 3 F2F minutes
19:38:26 <Paul> Minutes approved
19:39:25 <Paul> No objections to closing incoporated issues in snapshot
19:39:42 <Paul> TOPIC: new issues
19:39:54 <Paul> 7013
19:40:05 <Bob> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7013
19:41:20 <Paul> issue accepted
19:41:27 <Paul> 7014
19:41:30 <Bob> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7014
19:42:07 <Paul> issue accepted
19:42:50 <Paul> 7015
19:42:54 <Bob> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7015
19:43:00 <gpilz> q+
19:43:31 <Sreed> Sreed has joined #ws-ra
19:45:12 <Paul> Geoff: associated with 6398 - wich makes identification of message ambiguous
19:46:04 <Bob> ack gpi
19:47:12 <Zakim> + +1.408.274.aabb
19:47:12 <dug> q+
19:47:22 <fmaciel> zakim, aabb is fmaciel
19:47:22 <Zakim> +fmaciel; got it
19:47:26 <Paul> Gil:  Re formal objection. Does this issue address the issue?
19:47:55 <asir> q+
19:48:41 <Paul> Geoff: Objection remains if 7014 is not satisfactory
19:49:35 <Paul> Bob: Objections help air issues
19:50:34 <dug> q-
19:50:50 <asir> q-
19:51:00 <Paul> Gil: Feels objection was not originally raised as a technical issue
19:51:33 <Paul> issue accepted
19:51:54 <Paul> 7039 new issue
19:51:58 <Bob> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7039
19:53:33 <Paul> Doug: EPR identifier. Problem is ref params can be mis-used
19:53:47 <Paul> .. 1) Remove
19:54:10 <Paul> .. 2) Clear explanation in spec
19:54:38 <li> q+
19:54:50 <Bob> ack li
19:56:19 <Paul> li: with no identifier how is sub-mgr able to identify message?
19:57:07 <Paul> issue accepted
19:58:18 <Paul> Geoff: Mode proposal has been circulated
19:58:41 <gpilz> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/wiki/Use_Cases_for_6401-6661
19:59:18 <Paul> Gil: 6401 use cases complete
20:00:21 <li> q+
20:00:50 <Bob> acl li
20:00:50 <Paul> Bob: next step on 6401 is to develop requirements
20:02:13 <Bob> ack li
20:03:19 <Paul> Gil: would prefer to produce some proposals
20:03:28 <Wu> q+
20:03:41 <dug> q+
20:03:57 <Bob> ack wu
20:04:42 <Paul> Wu: Agrees with Bob - we should gather more requirements
20:05:13 <Paul> Wu: will try to develop requirements
20:06:04 <Bob> Action: Wu and Team 6401, develop detailed requirements extracted from usecases ref 6401
20:06:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-77 - And Team 6401, develop detailed requirements extracted from usecases ref 6401 [on wu chou - due 2009-06-30].
20:06:24 <Bob> ack dug
20:07:31 <Paul> Doug: Could proposal owners explain how arrived at their proposals
20:07:45 <dug> ... in the wiki
20:07:53 <Geoff> q+
20:08:03 <Paul> TOPIC: issue-6925
20:08:05 <Bob> ack geoff
20:08:23 <gpilz> q+
20:08:28 <dug> q+
20:09:27 <Zakim> -Asir
20:09:36 <Paul> Geoff: Have examined how a literal resource can be defined. 
20:09:38 <Yves> s/6925/6975/
20:09:39 <asir> sorry we got cut off
20:09:48 <asir> we are dialing back in
20:09:51 <Bob> resolution: All agreed
20:10:14 <asir> all agreed with geoff!
20:10:29 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
20:11:33 <Paul> Geoff: Can definition simply say that the service defines resource
20:11:44 <Bob> q?
20:11:49 <Bob> ack gp
20:13:03 <dug> darn - gil is taking my comment  :-)
20:13:29 <Bob> ack dug
20:14:40 <Paul> Gil: "literal" must be defined in a broader way than service
20:14:57 <Geoff> q+
20:15:05 <Bob> ack geo
20:15:40 <dug> q+
20:16:40 <Bob> ack dug
20:16:42 <Paul> Doug: could schema be used
20:17:48 <asir> they are sever-specific, similar to HTTP
20:18:03 <asir> s/sever-specific/service-specific/
20:18:16 <Paul> Geoff: With schema how can client and service have different understanding of the resource definitions?
20:18:56 <gpilz> q+
20:19:33 <Paul> Doug: need a way for service to advertise what is valid XML for a create request
20:19:45 <Bob> ack gpi
20:20:24 <asir> well ...
20:20:26 <Paul> Gil: issue described by Doug sounds like 6401
20:20:53 <asir> it is upto resource owners to advertise resource descriptions
20:21:03 <asir> this is orthogonal to transfer
20:21:29 <dug> q+
20:21:39 <Bob> ack dug
20:22:25 <Paul> Doug: "server knows" approach. How does the client know?
20:22:41 <gpilz> what issue are we discussing?
20:22:50 <Bob> 3975
20:22:55 <Bob> 6975
20:22:57 <gpilz> q+
20:23:11 <asir> Transfer is a generic protocol
20:23:25 <dug> q+
20:23:28 <dug> "there no interop here" ?
20:23:40 <dug> s/there/there's/
20:23:48 <asir> s/interop/interop issue/
20:23:58 <dug> no I quoted him  :-)
20:24:06 <dug> correctly
20:24:09 <asir> that is what i heard
20:24:11 <Bob> aggreed
20:24:20 <Paul> Geoff: server defines and advertises its resource definitions
20:24:30 <Bob> ack gpi
20:25:35 <Geoff> q+
20:25:59 <Paul> Gil: Sees the use case where client and service are tightly coupled. However there are services that are not data aware
20:26:56 <Bob> ack dug
20:27:11 <Paul> Gil: We could remove reference to literal resource  rather than define it
20:28:14 <Paul> Doug: Removing literal resource definition means all data becomes opaque
20:29:20 <Paul> Doug: How does the client know definition of instructions available
20:29:41 <Bob> ack geo
20:30:31 <Asir2> Asir2 has joined #ws-ra
20:31:09 <dug> q+
20:31:48 <Paul> Geoff: already feels that Transfer client needs additional information to function. A link between client and service must be defined.
20:31:51 <Bob> ack dug
20:32:41 <Zakim> - +91.98.49.99.aaaa
20:33:05 <Zakim> + +91.98.49.99.aacc
20:33:15 <Paul> Doug: feels there are cases when a client may be able to either send an instruction or some literal data. Client needs to know the difference.
20:35:27 <Paul> Geoff: a policy mechanism to help service sounds useful. However it should only be a hint not strict definition
20:36:08 <Paul> TOPIC: issue-6413
20:36:17 <dug> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/9/03/Issue-6413-2009-03-25.html
20:36:24 <Geoff> q+
20:37:29 <Bob> ack geo
20:37:38 <Paul> Geoff: can we take a higher level look at the issue
20:37:58 <Paul> .. what are the real goals?
20:38:50 <dug> q+
20:38:56 <Bob> ack dug
20:39:06 <Paul> Geoff: is it to force WS-MAN ti implement frag support?
20:39:30 <Paul> Doug: is it not about WS-MAN
20:40:38 <asir> Doug mentioned - clear direction to the industry (that includes WS-Man
20:41:15 <Paul> ..  it is for interop and industry direction
20:41:47 <Geoff> q+
20:42:01 <Bob> ack geoff
20:42:23 <Bob> q+
20:42:32 <Yves> I wonder if the WG should work on a single spec instead of five, to avoid "proliferation"
20:42:45 <dug> yves +1 
20:43:03 <dug> would help guarantee people make sure they all work together
20:43:04 <Paul> Bob: mentions that DaveS feels this issue may lead to multiple frag specs being developed
20:44:02 <dug> q+
20:44:11 <Paul> Geoff: If we define a good frag spec then it will be used and become adopted
20:45:11 <Paul> Geoff: we should not fore people to use a frag spec they do not want
20:45:25 <Bob> ack bob
20:45:48 <Paul> Bob: how does WS-RT relate to frag support in WS-MAN?
20:46:11 <Paul> Doug: very simplar
20:46:24 <asir> q+
20:46:50 <Paul> Doug: new proposal is different from WS-RT
20:47:41 <Paul> Doug: header / body main diff.
20:48:19 <Paul> Bob: if frag support were in WS-T what would be left in RT?
20:48:32 <Bob> ack asir
20:48:47 <asir> q+
20:48:50 <Paul> Doug: other things do remain
20:49:08 <Bob> ack dug
20:50:05 <Paul> Doug: aspect 1) framework for frag support. 2) definition of dialects which are open for new definitions.
20:50:36 <Bob> ack Yv
20:51:45 <Paul> Yves: do not need to support frags for WS-T, or vice versa.
20:51:52 <Geoff> agree with Yves
20:51:54 <Bob> ack asir
20:52:16 <Geoff> +
20:52:18 <Geoff> q+
20:53:06 <Bob> ack geo
20:53:18 <Paul> Asir: there are many differences between proposal and WS-MAN 
20:53:21 <Yves> for the minutes, to get frags adopter you need a good spec and good implementations, more than sticking it in any other spec
20:53:28 <Yves> s/adopter/adopted
20:53:36 <asir> +1 to Yves
20:54:00 <asir> a good W3C spec that describes frag only is a clear direction to the industry (including WS-Man
20:54:16 <Bob> q+
20:54:54 <dug> would we ever say that?
20:55:13 <asir> s/good W3C/W3C/
20:55:16 <Paul> Geoff: composability is important. This is is made worse by proposal
20:55:29 <Geoff> q+
20:57:01 <Paul> Bob: is it felt a good independant frag spec would encourage adoption?
20:57:44 <Bob> ack bob
20:58:28 <Paul> Doug: a lot of spes build extensible support into main spec.
20:58:42 <Bob> ack geo
21:00:46 <Paul> Bob: is frag independant or part of WS-T?
21:00:50 <Zakim> -Vikas
21:00:54 <Zakim> -fmaciel
21:00:55 <Zakim> -Wu_Chou
21:00:57 <Zakim> - +91.98.49.99.aacc
21:00:57 <fmaciel> fmaciel has left #ws-ra
21:00:58 <Zakim> -Yves
21:00:58 <Zakim> -asir
21:01:00 <Zakim> -Doug_Davis
21:01:00 <Zakim> -Bob_Freund
21:01:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/06/23-ws-ra-minutes.html Yves
21:01:07 <Zakim> -Paul
21:01:21 <Zakim> -Gilbert
21:01:23 <Zakim> WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
21:01:24 <Zakim> Attendees were [Microsoft], Bob_Freund, +91.98.49.99.aaaa, Doug_Davis, Gilbert, Paul, Vikas, Ram, Geoff, Yves, Li, +1.408.274.aabb, fmaciel, +91.98.49.99.aacc
21:01:29 <gpilz> gpilz has left #ws-ra
21:36:05 <dug> dug has joined #ws-ra
21:36:27 <dug> yves - what's the URL to the transcript for today's call?
21:36:43 <dug> rssagent, where are we?
21:36:58 <dug> rssagent where am i ?
23:03:34 <Zakim> Zakim has left #ws-ra