[graap-wg] minutes from 1/11 telecon

[Heiko Ludwig]

In response to the comment

  - "several comments"; action item 3:

The XQueryX standard (XML Syntax for XQuery 1.0 (XQueryX)) became a 
candidate recommendation in November. The reference should be: 
http://www.w3.org/TR/xqueryx/ Let's use this reference. 

Heiko


-----
Heiko Ludwig, Dr. rer. pol.
IBM TJ Watson Research Center, PO Box 704, Yorktown, NY, 10598
hludwig at us.ibm.com, tel. +1 914 784 7160,  mob. +1 646 675 8469
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/h/hludwig/





Jim Pruyne <jim_pruyne at hp.com> 
Sent by: owner-graap-wg at ggf.org
01/11/2006 11:03 AM

To
GRAAP-WG <graap-wg at gridforum.org>
cc

Subject
[graap-wg] minutes from 1/11 telecon






Attached...

--- Jim


Notes from Jan. 11 Teleconference
---------------------------------


Attendees
---------

Wolfgang Ziegler
Heiko Ludwig
Asit Dan
Jim Pruyne
Philipp Wieder


Agenda Items
------------

- GGF: No schedule has been posted yet.
  * One session on spec. updates prior to GGF16
  * Two more sessions of implementation presentations, continuing
  discussions from presentations from previous GGF.

- OGSA F2F:
  * Jim will plan to attend for a couple hours
  * Will there be any feedback on the spec. through this?  Philipp:
    perhaps not as they look only to consume based on last F2F.
 
- Wolfgang provided feedback to GGF Office on status of deliverables
  as requested by Joel.

- Comments:
  - Missing references: Philipp to do this in the next day, and
    re-upload 
    - To Remove: SNAP
    - Also to update to the proper link for various specs.

  - Flexibility of WS-A. comment:
    - 1. We don't think the current WS-Agreement prohibits what he's
         suggesting, but we also don't define it.
    - 2. Basically DoS attack concerns.  Agreed, that this might be a
         nice thing to be able to do, but we consider it outside the
         scope of WS-Agreement.  Many of these issues are true for any
         web service, and not specific to WS-Agreement, though how one
         searches the possible agreement space is somewhat more
         relevant.
    - 3. We specifically restricted to 2 parties to avoid specific
         remediation of multiple parties.  That is, who specifically
        is at fault when there are more than two parties with specific
        responsibilities to one another.  Therefore, we limit WS-Agreement
        to two party.
    - 4. Agreed that a library service is useful, but it is outside
         the scope of WS-Agreement.  For signing, and authentication, 
other
         general practices for web services should be applicable.

  - Discovery of compatible agreement parties
    - There is some hint as to the valid languages in the template
      based on the definition of namespaces.  That is, an initiator
      should be sure that all namespaces declared in the template are
      understood.  However, this seems like a good point, and the
      suggestion seems valid.  Our current thinking is to consider
      this in a next version based on some experience with the current
      version.  It may be that some practice like this will emerge
      which we could incorporate in a future version.  The reference
      to a similar use in wsrp does help us to see a model that might
      be used.

  - "sorry for the late post" to be addressed on future call due to
    time constraints.

  - "several comments"
    - 1. Version will come from reference, and as needed in the
         specification name.  Philipp to update along with references.
    - 2. Already has been addressed.  Philipp to double check.
    - 3. Heiko to investigate status.
    - 4., 5., 6., 7. Are covered by the "Missing references" comment.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20060111/8c1d4b5f/attachment.html