Preliminary Minutes WSRM TC Conference Call � Mar 20, 2007

5:30 � 6:30 PM EDT.

Textual Conventions

� Action Item

Motion

� Resolution

1 Draft Agenda:

Agenda ��

1. review agenda

2. Roll Call

3. Minutes approval

4. Action Items

5. Review Draft Deployment Template Document

5 Review Draft Application Notes for Intelligent appliances

6 Discussion mechanics of committee future

7 New Business

Agenda approved

2 Roll Call

Attendance:

First Name	Last Name	Role	Company
Jacques	Durand	Secretary	Fujitsu Limited*
Kazunori	Iwasa	Voting Member	Fujitsu Limited*
Tom	Rutt	Chair	Fujitsu Limited*
Eisaku	Nishiyama	Voting Member	Hitachi, Ltd.*
Nobuyuki	Yamamoto	Voting Member	Hitachi, Ltd.*
Robert	Freund	Voting Member	Hitachi, Ltd.*
Paul	Knight	Voting Member	Nortel Networks Limited*
jeff	mischkinsky	Member	Oracle Corporation*
Pete	Wenzel	Voting Member	Sun Microsystems

Meeting is quorate

3 Minutes Discussion

Tom Rutt volunteered to take minutes.

3.1 Approval of previous meeting minutes

The minutes of the March 6 teleconference meeting are posted at: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/22926/MinutesWsrmTC-030607.htm

Jacques� moved to approve the March 6� minutes, Bob seconded.

No opposition March 6 minutes are approved

4 Status of Action Items

Action 1: Jacques will post CD for application notes on web site.

Jacques will post on our site and to arrange for OASIS staff to post at correct url..

Action 2 on Tom is update public site to ensure it has up to date links.

5 Discussion on Draft Deployment Profile Template Document

Posted by Jacques:

http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/22783/wsrm-ApplicationNotes-cd.doc

Jacques: I applied what was done in ebxml TC, to help users of standard to profile their use of these standards.

The way we built the template was to go thru the spec, and to take any Option or Should in the spec and take that as a candidate to ask a question in the template.
Users may also want to customize the contents of a field (e.g, extensions) related to their own business.� Group ID format restrictions is one example.
Third aspect is related to logistics for deploying the profile.� This is reflected in the last sections of the proposed document. �operational aspects of Profile� section 5.

Section 4 is detailed aspects for the profile, which might affect interoperability at application level.

Jacques: It was not hard to produce, since I just went for the Options in our spec, using a template structure from other TCs.

Tom: I would find it useful.

Tom: would people be willing to vote on this document in two weeks time.

Bob: we would like time to review.

Comments should be posted by Tuesday of Next week.

Put on� agenda for CD vote for meeting in two weeks.

6 Discussion of Application Notes for Information Appliances

Draft Application Notes From Iwasa posted as: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/22959/WS-ReliabilityProfileforInformationAppliancesEnglish1.0.pdf

A Profile of Reliable Web Services Messaging for Information Appliances Services

[WS-Reliability]

Iwasa translated the document to English.� It is not using the new template.� I could upload a new profile using this template.� I could do that before next Tuesday.

Bob: What is the Document�s Intap approval process.� What is forcast of Intap process for this document.

Iwasa: It is in the approval process.� The Japanese profile will be approved.� It was discussed to submit the document to this TC.�

Bob: The document has not yet been approved by INTAP.� There could be changes as it goes thru the INTAP discussion process.

Iwasa: there is some leeway to change the document.� However there are no anticipate changes.�

Bob: Could you check the formal status of this document in INTAP.

Bob: there are sections in the draft which are incomplete, section 4.1 group termination last page.� Something seems to be missing.

Tom: the status within INTAP needs to be clarified.

Iwasa: the SIG agrees the content, and will submit for public review.

Bob: so the public review process has not yet started.

Tom: we cannot change the web site after april 15.� So if we don have a definitive reference form INTAP by that date, we cannot update the site after that date.

Tom: when could public review within INTAP be done.

Iwasa: one or two months.

Tom: We agreed before it would be best to be given a stable url to Intap.

Pete: they have given such a stable URL.

Iwasa: I have sent out the URL for intap web site.

Document Description:

This document is to recommend how WS-Reliability should be implemented or

used for Information Appliances.

You will be able to download the approved version at the following link: http://net2.intap.or.jp/SPIA/sig3_hrwsm.htm *Currently it is not yet posted there.

Tom: could we get a statement from INTAP by the next meeting on a stable URL.

Tom: how do we get a version conforming to template by middle of april.

Iwasa: I could produce a profile document conforming to template with us voting to CD

Pete : That would be a derivative work to reformat and translate to English.

Jacques: the TC could vote that the profile conforms to the template.� Could we agree to approve as an instance of these templates.

Pete: that is fine if we have permission to publish derivative work, with all IPR and copyright issues.� That is why we decided it better to refer by reference.

Iwasa: Intap would be able to change copyright.

Pete: we would need clear copyright and ipr transfer.

Tom: how can this TC decide if the question answers are correct for their field of application.

Jacques: we could certify that the profile is a proper instance of the template.� We could give it exemplar value.� However its endorsement would have to be limited to the usage of template not contents.

Reference preferred, anything else would require more discussion

7 Discussion of Committee Future

Propose next meeting in two weeks: April 3

On agenda will be a vote for CD on template.

Also continue Discussion of the Intelligent appliance profile.

Bob: pursue ruling on contribute document from INTAP to Jamie.� Needs to be communication from INTAP.

Tom: how could we get copyright transfer to OASIS by next week.

Jacques: I can coordinate with IWASA and the OASIS staff.

Paul K : there is a statement on March 15 document.

Bob: that statement is outside my purview.

Pete: that statement could come from the INTAP staff.

Jacques: but Fujitsu is a copyright owner.

Tom: Jacques should work this out with the staff at OASIS.

1 New Business

Every member should be a public web site reviewer.� Mail editorial issues to list.� The public site will be all that is available after April 15.

Members should send email from now until next meeting.�� We will discuss proposed changes to the public site at next meeting.

wsrm message