W3C

Semantic Annotations for WSDL WG teleconference

22 Aug 2006

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
RA, JK, HL, EP, AS, CV
Regrets
CB, JF, LF, JM, TP, BNS, TV
Chair
JacekK
Scribe
rama

Contents


Action Items

<scribe> ACTION: EricP and JacekK to draft an RDF mapping section for SAWSDL [PENDING] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action01]

<Amit> I would be happy to RDF mapping draft

<Amit> review

<Amit> I mean: SAWSDL RDF mapping draft when you have one

<scribe> ACTION: EricP to add text gravy to his annotated Amazon WSDL and put it in Examples document [PENDING] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action02]

Eric: zero progress. Intends to do it

<scribe> ACTION: JacekK to send editorial comments to editors [PENDING] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action03]

<scribe> ACTION: EricP to let XMLCore know about attrExtensions element [PENDING] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action04]

<scribe> ACTION: JacekK to summarize discussion on issue 26 on mailing list [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action05]

<Amit> my action item: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-semann/2006Aug/0010.html

Administrivia

Jack walked through Face-2-Face agenda

rama: Why do we need the third f2f?

Jack: To address public comments that will be coming on after last call
... If we have too little material, we may revisit whether to have the 3rd f2f

Eric: Could talk about SPDL work at Torino f2f

Jack: Will add it to the agenda

Claudio: Could we talk about the semantic UDDI discussion

Amit: Will put up a book chapter about UGA's work on semantic UDDI

Jack: Someone should present an overview as a starting point before we have this discussion

Amit: There may be near/interim term relevance of semantic UDDI in the scientific computing

Claudio: from an industrial point of view there is a requirement for SAWSDL to work with UDDI
... Would like to see if other technologies such as UDDI supporting this kind of annotations.

Jack: Is willing to put it on Agenda.
... If someone is willing to give us a presentation.

Amit: Independent of UDDI, we should discuss 'relevance of SAWSDL to registries'

Jack: That discussion would be vague.
... We have to be specific. Would like to keep it more concrete.
... There may be interesting discussion around registries. Would like the discussion to evolve from UDDI.

Rama: I will be happy to present an overview on UDDI and some initial thoughts on how SAWSDL could work with UDDI

<JacekK> ACTION: Rama (with help of Amit) to prepare a UDDI presentation for the 2nd day of the f2f [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action06]

Jack: prepare for 15 min of presentation
... and we can schedule 15 min for discussion

Telecon Sep 5 Canceled

Status of documents

Holger: Will address minor comments today
... Would like comments from others today

Rama: Able to freeze the documents by end of business tomorrow

Jack: Send html attachment to public mailing list at the end of tomorrow to meet the freezing requirements. That way editors could continue to work on the document

Issue 26

Jack: We don't want to propogate categorization info from interfaces to operations

Eric: Are they two orthagonal properties that we want to mix them here?

Jack: you seem to be talking about something different

Amit: Doesn't understand the need for categorization whatsoever
... What about thesaurus, dictionary, taxonomy etc. Why just talk about categorization?
... Might be best to put it in Appendix

Jack: Might want to soften the language in section 2.1.1
... from "in particular" to "for example"

Amit: That would be nice. Consider saying that we do not constrain the user with a specific KR model

<JacekK> ACTION: Editors to add text to 2.1.1 that we do not constrain the form of the semantic model for categorization (or for model reference on interface in general) and soften "in particular" to "for example" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action07]

<Zakim> ericP, you wanted to ask if special categorization text is warranted by user/reader needs

Eric: wants to raise the bar on when it is we want some form of inheritance
... Inherting context could make things messy. We should have clear use cases before we go there

Jack agrees with it

RESOLUTION: Issue 26: Add categorization text for operation with no inheritance or propagation rules

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Editors to add text to 2.1.1 that we do not constrain the form of the semantic model for categorization (or for model reference on interface in general) and soften "in particular" to "for example" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Rama (with help of Amit) to prepare a UDDI presentation for the 2nd day of the f2f [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action06]
 
[PENDING] ACTION: EricP and JacekK to draft an RDF mapping section for SAWSDL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action01]
[PENDING] ACTION: EricP to add text gravy to his annotated Amazon WSDL and put it in Examples document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action02]
[PENDING] ACTION: EricP to let XMLCore know about attrExtensions element [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action04]
[PENDING] ACTION: JacekK to send editorial comments to editors [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action03]
 
[DONE] ACTION: JacekK to summarize discussion on issue 26 on mailing list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/minutes/20060822#action05]