19:23:29 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
19:23:29 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-ws-ra-irc
19:23:31 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:23:31 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ws-ra
19:23:33 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WSRA
19:23:33 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
19:23:34 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
19:23:34 <trackbot> Date: 01 September 2009
19:23:38 <Zakim> WS_WSRA()3:30PM has now started
19:23:45 <Zakim> +[IBM]
19:24:18 <Vikas> Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:25:00 <Zakim> +Bob_Freund
19:26:20 <Paul> Paul has joined #ws-ra
19:26:52 <Tom_Rutt> Tom_Rutt has joined #ws-ra
19:27:41 <Bob> chair: Bob Freund
19:27:48 <Zakim> + +25625669aaaa
19:28:16 <Bob> zakim, aaaa is Paul
19:28:16 <Zakim> +Paul; got it
19:28:29 <Zakim> +Tom_Rutt
19:29:08 <Zakim> +Igor_Sedukhin
19:29:19 <Zakim> +??P9
19:29:25 <li> li has joined #ws-ra
19:29:39 <Zakim> +Vikas
19:30:21 <Zakim> +li
19:30:37 <gpilz> gpilz has joined #ws-ra
19:30:50 <Zakim> +gpilz
19:30:54 <Ashok> Ashok has joined #ws-ra
19:31:14 <DaveS> DaveS has joined #ws-ra
19:31:31 <Zakim> +Yves
19:31:52 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
19:32:43 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
19:32:50 <Bob> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0087.html
19:33:23 <asir> asir has joined #ws-ra
19:33:26 <Ram> Ram has joined #ws-ra
19:34:19 <Bob> scribe: Vikas Varma
19:34:21 <Tom_Rutt> Tom_Rutt has joined #ws-ra
19:34:28 <Bob> scribenick: Vikas
19:35:05 <Sreed> Sreed has joined #ws-ra
19:35:57 <Bob> Agenda - agreed
19:36:41 <Bob> Resolution: Minutes of 2009-08-25 approved w/o
19:38:06 <Vikas1> Vikas1 has joined #ws-ra
19:38:40 <dug> the term "normal company" could be hard to define
19:39:02 <Vikas1> Bob, can you mark Vikas1 as scribe.
19:39:48 <Bob> scribenick: Vikas1
19:41:07 <Vikas1> Topic: action item review.
19:42:39 <Vikas1> Topic: Progress with initial draft of WS-Frag
19:43:44 <Vikas1> Dug/Ram : Going through internal review
19:44:15 <Vikas1> Dog/Ram : Will try to put the proposal before next call.
19:45:02 <dug> 129.33.49.251
19:45:35 <Vikas> Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:46:19 <Vikas2> Vikas2 has joined #ws-ra
19:46:39 <Bob> scribenick: Vikas2
19:47:48 <Bob> resolution: Open 7429 w/o
19:47:57 <Vikas> Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:48:17 <Bob> resolution: issue-7429 resolved with proposal in bugzilla w/o
19:49:01 <Vikas> Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:49:02 <Yves> dug, hsould be ok now
19:49:21 <dug> yep - works thanks!
19:49:37 <Bob> resolution Issue-7430 opened w/o
19:50:15 <Bob> resolution: Issue 7430 resolved with proposal in bugzilla
19:50:34 <Bob> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7478
19:51:09 <Bob> scribenick: Vikas
19:51:37 <Vikas> yes Bob
19:54:02 <Vikas> resolution: Issue-7478 opened w/o.
19:54:16 <asir> when do we stop opening issues :-)
19:54:46 <dug> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Sep/att-0004/ws-eventing-6401-6-dug5.doc
19:55:35 <dug> yves - failing again
19:55:41 <Vikas> ACTION: Gilbert to provide proposal on 7478
19:55:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Provide proposal on 7478 [on Gilbert Pilz - due 2009-09-08].
19:56:06 <gpilz> q+
19:56:24 <dug> Yves - IP is: 129.33.49.251
19:56:25 <Bob> ack gpi
19:57:21 <gpilz> q+
19:57:36 <Bob> ack gpi
19:57:51 <asir> q+
19:57:56 <dug> yves - working again - thanks
19:58:00 <Vikas> Ram: Is it necessary to define a seperate mine-type.
19:58:15 <Bob> asir
19:58:21 <Bob> ack asir
19:59:16 <dug> what does that involve?
19:59:21 <dug> (the process)
19:59:23 <Bob> application
19:59:52 <Vikas> Bob: Is there any objection to define a new mime-type?
20:00:02 <Ashok> I  understand that getting a new mime type is a long drawn-out process
20:00:05 <asir> q+
20:00:12 <Bob> ack asir
20:00:54 <Vikas> Gil: Suggest to drive it as a seperate issue.
20:02:32 <gpilz> q+
20:02:41 <dug> thanks
20:03:15 <gpilz> q-
20:05:12 <asir> Good!
20:05:20 <Vikas> RESOLUTION: No objection on the latest proposal. 6401 resolved with comment 12.
20:05:42 <li> you're welcome
20:05:53 <Bob> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6694
20:05:56 <Zakim> +JeffM
20:06:18 <Ram> Proposed resolution for 6694: "An endpoint MAY indicate that it supports WS-Eventing, or its features, by including the WS-Eventing Policy assertion(s) within its WSDL.  By doing so the endpoint is indicating that the corresponding WS-Eventing operations are supported by that endpoint even they do not explicitly appear in its WSDL”.
20:06:42 <dug> q+
20:07:14 <Bob> ack dug
20:07:17 <dug> ram - s/even/even though/    right?
20:11:00 <asir> Vow, two big issues out of the way!!
20:11:10 <asir> quite a day!
20:11:10 <Vikas> No objection on the latest proposal. 6694 6401 resolved with comment  7 and 8.
20:11:22 <Vikas> s/6401/
20:11:29 <asir> s/6401//
20:12:29 <dug> he's just hiding
20:13:26 <Bob> Topic: Infoset
20:14:28 <Ram> q+
20:14:45 <Bob> ack ram
20:15:09 <DaveS> What issue number are we talking about?
20:15:18 <Ashok> 6700
20:15:29 <Bob> Issue 6700 et alia
20:16:36 <Ram> q+
20:16:42 <Bob> ack ram
20:17:44 <dug> q+
20:18:31 <Ram> q+
20:18:43 <Bob> ack dug
20:18:48 <li> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0064.html
20:19:01 <dug> This specification is defined in terms of XML 1.0.  A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as described below, and it is recommended that this should be used for any non-XML serializations.
20:19:50 <Bob> ack ram
20:20:13 <Bob> ack yves
20:21:09 <dug> This specification is defined in terms of XML 1.0. A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as described in the Infoset specification [http:...], and it is recommended that this should be used for any non-XML serializations.  See the Infoset specification for more details.
20:21:20 <li> q+
20:21:24 <dug> q+
20:21:28 <Bob> proposal for resolution of 6700, 6701, 6702,6703, and 6704
20:21:37 <Bob> ack li
20:22:08 <Ram> Amended proposal: This specification is defined in terms of XML 1.0.  A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as described in the Infoset specification [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/], and it is recommended that this should be used for any non-XML serializations.
20:22:23 <li> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Sep/0003.html
20:22:30 <dug> Ram - add the final sentence (para)
20:22:34 <Ashok> Yves, are you ok with Ram's wording?
20:23:42 <Ram> Doug - I got rid of the last para and merged it into the first para. That is, the ref to Infoset spec is in this first para.
20:23:51 <Yves> not really, it is important to say that the spec is defined in terms on Infoset and not XML1.0
20:24:02 <asir> q+
20:24:07 <dug> ok - as long as people don't want the "see XXX for more details"
20:24:13 <dug> guess its just noise
20:24:14 <dug> q-
20:24:23 <Bob> ack asir
20:24:27 <Ashok> Yes, that's what I thought ... on second thought I agree with that
20:24:29 <Yves> see http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#reltoxml and http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapenv
20:25:17 <Yves> [[A SOAP message is specified as an XML infoset whose comment, element, attribute, namespace and character information items are able to be serialized as XML 1.0.]]
20:25:39 <dug> q+
20:25:49 <Bob> ack dug
20:26:35 <Tom_Rutt_> Tom_Rutt_ has joined #ws-ra
20:26:43 <asir> q+
20:26:58 <Bob> ack asir
20:26:58 <Yves> In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0064.html, if we add a sentence saying that valid infosets for this specification are ones serializable using XML 1.0 should be enough
20:28:04 <Ashok> q+
20:28:11 <li> yves, that link is broken
20:28:59 <Bob> ashok
20:29:03 <Bob> ack ashok
20:29:51 <Ram> Amended proposal: This specification is defined in terms of XML 1.0.  A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as described in the Infoset specification [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/], and it is recommended that this should be used for any non-XML serializations. Valid infosets for this specification are ones serializable using XML 1.0.
20:30:25 <dug> q+
20:30:40 <Yves> well, that prevents in a way serialization of an infoset into something else, better say that it's an infoset and restricted to serialization in XML1.0
20:32:00 <Yves> proposal: This specification is defined in terms of XML Information Set (Infoset)
20:32:08 <Yves> , even though the specification uses XML 1.0
20:32:09 <Yves> terminology.
20:32:47 <Yves> Valid Infoset for this specification are the one serializable in XML 1.0, hence the use of XML 1.0.
20:33:22 <gpilz> q+
20:33:45 <asir> q+
20:33:47 <Bob> ack dug
20:34:17 <Bob> ack yves
20:35:37 <jeffm> jeffm has joined #ws-ra
20:36:52 <Bob> ack gpi
20:37:19 <Ram> Minor amendment to Yves's proposal: This specification is defined in terms of XML Information Set (Infoset) [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/], even though the specification uses XML 1.0 terminology. Valid Infoset for this specification are the one serializable in XML 1.0, hence the use of XML 1.0.
20:38:01 <Ram> q+
20:38:22 <Bob> ack ram
20:38:24 <Bob> ack asir
20:38:37 <asir> This sounds like the min to close all our infoset issues
20:38:43 <dug> q+
20:39:36 <asir> I think the third para is already represented in the above proposal
20:39:59 <Bob> ack dug
20:40:37 <asir> Would Doug be okay if we were to say ...
20:40:47 <asir> This spec can be used in terms of ....
20:41:22 <Bob> despite all appearances, this spec is defined (somewhere in a non-disclosed location) in Infoset Notation
20:41:53 <asir> ..
20:41:54 <asir> This specification can be used in terms of XML Information Set (Infoset) [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/], even though the specification uses XML 1.0 terminology. Valid Infoset for this specification are the one serializable in XML 1.0, hence the use of XML 1.0.
20:42:28 <asir> :-)
20:43:05 <asir> Vow .. we closed 8 issues today.
20:43:31 <asir> i stand corrected 10 issues
20:43:50 <DaveS> Can we go home erly?
20:43:58 <dug> end on a high note?
20:45:07 <Bob> cwna for 6424
20:45:10 <li> and i didn't even say a word
20:45:12 <asir> vow .. that is 11
20:45:32 <dug> sure
20:45:58 <Vikas> RESOLUTION: No objection on the latest proposal put forward in the chat room for 6700, 6701, 6702, 6703, and 6704. 
20:46:07 <Vikas> RESOLUTION: 6424 closed with no action.
20:46:39 <Yves> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/0082.html
20:48:13 <Vikas> Topic : Issue 6533
20:48:34 <DaveS> q+
20:49:41 <Bob> ack dave
20:53:20 <asir> Standalone makes sense
20:53:32 <DaveS> +1 to standalone
20:53:39 <asir> Where will we add this para?
20:57:32 <dug> I'm assuming that the non-Get ops in Transfer are non-safe so a ref to (b) should be added - the proposal doesn't actually say that.
20:57:34 <dug> q+
20:59:19 <Bob> ack dug
21:00:55 <asir> that's a dozen
21:01:02 <asir> do you want to try a bakers dozen?
21:01:09 <DaveS> bye
21:01:25 <Zakim> -??P9
21:01:51 <Zakim> -Yves
21:01:53 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
21:01:53 <Zakim> -Paul
21:01:53 <Vikas> Vikas has joined #ws-ra
21:01:55 <Zakim> -JeffM
21:01:56 <Zakim> -[IBM]
21:01:58 <Zakim> -Bob_Freund
21:01:58 <Zakim> -Vikas
21:01:58 <Zakim> -gpilz
21:01:58 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
21:02:05 <Zakim> -li
21:02:14 <Zakim> -Igor_Sedukhin
21:02:33 <Bob> resolution: Issue-6533 resolved with the proposal contained in comment #4 and comment # 6
21:03:09 <Bob> rsagent, generate minutes
21:03:17 <Bob> rrsagent, generate minutes
21:03:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-ws-ra-minutes.html Bob
21:07:14 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, Tom_Rutt, in WS_WSRA()3:30PM
21:07:15 <Zakim> WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
21:07:17 <Zakim> Attendees were [IBM], Bob_Freund, +25625669aaaa, Paul, Tom_Rutt, Igor_Sedukhin, Vikas, li, gpilz, Yves, Ashok_Malhotra, [Microsoft], JeffM
21:36:57 <gpilz> gpilz has left #ws-ra
21:49:42 <dug> dug has joined #ws-ra