XML Abstract Model Subgroup telcon, March 14, 2001

Attendees

Agenda

Review actions

Henrik - Glossary needs to be ready tonight?
David - No, yesterday
Henrik - Can we add fig. 2.1?
Stuart - Has updated the glossary table. Wants closure on definition for
Module, Handler and Block.
David - Is the table very different from the one on the WG Web site?
Stuart - No, small changes only, eg. targetable.
Mark J. - Targetting is done via headers in SOAP, but glossary is
different. What is being targetted?
Henrik - (not recorded)

Stuart - If disagree to any definition, we should move discussion to
email. Need agreement on Module, Handler, Block, processor (def 1 or 2),
targettable (in or out). Propose targettable out for now; needs more
work.
Henrik - In; we could discuss the def right now. Also don't like
targetable crossed out.
Stuart - (not recorded)
Mark J. - Are blocks targetted at handlers or modules?
Stuart - Handlers! Consensus for Module, Handler, Block?
Consensus, no dissent.

Stuart - Take 2nd definition with Henrik's change for Processor?
Scott - Why leave faults out?
Stuart - Someone thought was too prescriptive. Could reintegrate striked
out text from 1st definition, and append it to 2nd.
Stuart - Any dissent?
Jean-Jacques - Would prefer not to reintegrate striked out text, but
could leave with it.
Stuart - If discussion, to email. Take as is?
Agreed, no dissent.

Stuart - Targettable: pick one definition.
Henrik - Change "node" to "processor".
Stuart - Propose to take 1st definition, replacing node with processor.
Any dissent?
Agreed, no dissent.

Stuart - Done with glossary for now.
Henrik - What about definition for Application?
Stuart - Only required for now in AM, not in requirements document; +
needs more work.

Henrik - Suggestion to add figure 2.1 from AM to glossary (version with
labels: "receiver" and "sender").
Stuart - Ok. Can you do it?
Henrik - Yes (action 1).

David - Should send diff to people.
Stuart - Ok.

Stuart - Next action: service abstraction. Henrik?
Henrik - Pending; by Friday (action 2).

Stuart - Next action: (no record).

Stuart - Next action: assignements. Done.

Mark Jones' proposal
Mark - Proposed an abstract model for module processing. Reason: module
composition eg was not in SOAP. Henrik since then pointed out existence
of untargeted blocks; they can be referenced by other blocks. So reworked
proposal to better align with SOAP; using manifest blocks for
composition.
(Mark walks us through his proposal)

David - URI: is this an operational thing?
Henrik - SOAP doesn't say. We could also identify modules by namespace
only.
Mark Jones - Modules, or handlers?
David - Either
Henrik - Yes, either by type (module) or name (handler).
Jean-Jacques - Handlers could equally well be identified by type.

Scott - Need to leave; what about my section on mapping the AM  to SOAP?
David - Should be covered by the mapping SOAP to requirements work.
John - There is difference, though: the AM has modified existing
concepts, or introduced new ones. This is not covered by the issues list.

Stuart - Mark to add his section to the AM?
Mark Jones - Need another pass first, plus make the terminology
consistent, plus pass to Henrik for verification. (Action 3)
Stuart - This should replace section 5 of the AM.

AM

Stuart - No closure on one-way versus request-response. Anyone
volunteering text to describe the one-way proposal?
Henrik - This can be done through extensibility.
Stuart - Need replacement text; seeking proposal; but none so far.
Henrik - Fair enough.

Stuart - Protocol modules: owned by Mark. Attchments: will do it.
Binding: a bit loose; volunteers to redo section 6?
David - Related to Mark Hadley/ Henrik template binding?
Mark Hadley - Yes, but will also include concepts.
Stuart - Mark Hadley and Henrik to volunteer for section 6 text? (in
addition to template binding)
Henrik - Yes.
Mark Hadley - Yes, but 2 weeks only may be difficult. (Action 4?)
David - Could work on AM 1st, then template? + could flag sections in AM
as in progress
Mark Hadley - Ok if Henrik's ok to take over in 1.5 week.
David - A new person from IBM may help soon.

AOB

Stuart - Need a volunteer to report progress at tonight concall.
Henrik - David?
David - Need to know status.
Stuart - (recaps)

New actions

Action 1. Henrik to modify fig 2.1 of the AM (labels for receiver and
sender).
Action 2. Henrik to propose work on service abstraction by Friday
(pending from last week).
Action 3. Mark Jones to propose replacement text for section 5 by end of
month.
Action 4. Mark Hadley and Henrik to propose replacement text for section
6 by end of month.
Action 5. Stuart to remove section 7 (security) from AM.