IRC log of ws-arch on 2002-04-04

Web Services Architecture Working Group
2002-04-04 meeting minutes

Working Group home page · Meeting records

This is the complete version, possibly with confidential material, of the minutes.

Timestamps are in UTC.

zakim, what's the agenda?
I see 1 item on the agenda:
1. [from chris]
IRC log:
1. Roll call, scribes for minutes/action items (15.00 + 5)
Scribe: ScottV
ACTION: Chris, figure out how to get more members on IRC
mike is scribe
Scribe: MikeM
(not ScottV)
approval of minutes
agenda review
any other business
editor review? not much to report in item #6
joel: timing for callers at F2F
joel: breakout sessions in particular
new agenda item: time of telecon
time of call item: 2 in australia
3 in time conflict if time is moved up
the drumroll please...
I thought it was going to be the 15 minute compromise ;-)
proposal: alternate week to spread inconvenience
critisism: people will be droping off/early late
alternate week call intime debating
calendar software cannot handle schedule
debate going back offline...
correction - approach OK- details to work out
agenda: approval of minutes 3/29
chris: irc minutes working OK?
issue: no role in minutes.
I will volunteer for scribe on the next call I attend
henrik: bootstrap issue between role taking and scribe choosing
no objection to minutes approval 3/29
no objections to late binding the role to the minutes
item 4: review action items
DONE: ACTION: Hugo?: post minutes to public page
ACTION: Editors: Rename D-AG0006 into AG-0006: PENDING
draft goal 6 renamed to goal 6?
2nd action done
DONE: ACTION: Chris: Send email to public list asking for summary
DONE: ACTION: Chris: figure out how to fix DS
3rd action item done
ACTION: DavidO: Send updated version of DAG0010 to the public list and say that it was accepted [PENDING]
action 6 done
DONE: ACTION: Hugo, Doug: send new combined proposal for 13&14 to list and say that it was accepted
action 7 - not done
ACTION: Chris (and Zulah): send proposed wording to list and take it to email [PENDING]
I'm back.
agenda #5 status report
WS-CG report
CG minutes:
RDF interest group - ability to serialize
offer to host f2f in june in paris - accepted
June F2F logistics page:
6/10-6/14 in l'Exchangeur
f2f: WSD at start of week, WSA from mid week
action item 2 - pending
action item 5: pending
hugo: rest of report with WS-CG
hugo: coordinate with OASIS
hugo: check sept f2f dates with WSD
chris: f2f in virginia, dates at call end
Prep for f2f
organized by breakout sections
daniel: need a f2f item to explain csf process
chris: this is reflected in the current agenda
chris: progress in small groups
chris: report finding in regroup sessions
chris: this is the time to dial-up participation
chris: day1 refinement of goals using csf
chris: day2 - group refinement of day 1 results
sandip: logistics issue about rooms for breakouts
chris: we can use virtual rooms
sandip: possible to get separate rooms for breakouts? bridge issue?
chris: result --- get to a requirements document from a content perspective
chris: editors will clean up language afterwords
chris: breakouts organized by goals
chris: attempt to lump some goals together
query: some goals look like requirements and visa versa
query is daveo btw
daniel: refactoring will have to be done. get to 4/5 top level goals
mike: thanks
daveo: factoring based on requirements: security, reliability, discovery
chris: this is the priorization exercise
??: need some parallelization
suresh: we should pre-post the groupings
?? was DaveO
chris: will consider with proposal
roger: break into groups arbitarily then cycle topics through the groups
dave: successful groups have taskforces or committees
dave: to make progress, we will have to split up the work
chris: prioritation should handle this aspect
chris: want to give opportunity for each topic at the same time get some efficiency
chris: will consider topics tonight
chris: note the required reading, now includes the DAML-S stuff
query: is r. fielding in this group?
chris: do we want a tag update at the f2f
chris: daveo will do this in the afternoon
refine goals time
Mike: 3 options
... 1. keep the subgoals
... 2. remove them
... 3. keep the subgoals until the TAG gives us an explicit list
daveo: do not reinvent the work of the TAG
daniel: no need to try to define the web arch
dave: there are areas of disagreement with the TAG
dave: example is the use of REST - SOAP w/HTTP POST
markb: some obvious things we could use from the TAG in time
henrik: we should initiate some of the discussions between WSA and the TAG
daveh and then we'll wrap this one up
query: should a stronger liason with the TAG occur
regrettably, I have another meeting
henrik: TAG should take advantage of of our WSA group
chris: goal 11 - still pending
zakim, I'm Dave
I don't understand 'I'm Dave', Dave. Try /msg Zakim help
Q should be DaveO
markh: key arch issue is how WS arch evolves from the existing web. it is not a goal to be exactly consistent.
hugo: the web is the web and there are core principals
daveo: WS can refine certain aspects of the Web arch/model. Where is the delegation boundary between the groups.
chris: goal 12 time
paul: not much discussion. usage scenarios have been offered
paul: terminology is not critical - use cases vs usage scenarios
chris: we want to find some use cases
dave: xmlp has extensive use cases document
dave: strange to have a 3rd set of UCs
chris: our UC have been copied
dave: should be a UC coordination group
chris: we don't want to redo their UCs
chris: should explore a more formal expression of common UCs
chris: in the next CG
ACTION: Chris to bring up possibility of joint UC tf between WS WGs and next WS-CG meeting
daniel: UC have been harvested from elsewhere
RRSAgent, ACTION 5 = Chris to bring up possibility of joint usage scenarios and glossary TF between WS WGs at next WS-CG meeting
daniel: paul posted a doc with references to WS requirements harvesting
paul: should UCs should be in a goal?
zula: is this goal/csf's a business framing for use cases?
daniel: goals are for the group, so it is OK to cover the process of gathering UCs as a goal
zula: what level should the csf's be at?
zula: the intent is to enumerate the possible business usages
chris: also there are technical use cases
I just disconnected myself, be right back online
daniel: interactions points should be illustrated. the UC do not have to be business oriented
dave: the csf is not a set of UCs - but a means to measure whether we have met our goal
i just sent my thoughts on use case csf to the list
chris: did not put all the UCs in this goal
wsawg should manage master list of web services use cases
csf: other wg's should reference our use cases
I will start scribing now.
provides guidance for the development of the web services infrastructure needed to implement common business functions in a standards-based environment
coppied from the doc
provides guidance for the development of the web services infrastructure needed to implement common business functions in a standards-based environment
Is there a frameword within the web services architecture that will support at least an 80-20 of the functions currently offered by proprietary VAN's (Value Added Networks) to support EDI functions? In particular, will the web services architecture support reliable messaging, routing and intermediaries, unique ID and sequencing of messages and transaction processing?
appologies for messing up the references for the discussion:)
Daniel Austin:
... I agree with what you're doing. We use EDI extensively.
.. Perhaps we should not have it as a separate goal.
... But tackle it as a set of use cases.
... "User wants to buy somthing"
... "User wants an invoice"
... The other goals should address these user actions.
... Maybe these are not goals like the others are (eg security).
... But maybe other goals should take these into account.
Roger: My objective is to make sure these issues are not lost.
... I agree maybe they shouldn't all be goals.
... But I think of it as a goal that EDI should be covered.
Dave: The problem I had with this goal is that I saw a whole lot of requirements and solutions.
... These are requirements areas.
... But I don't think they should all be stated as goals.
Henrik: I agree. I think these are primarily user scenarios.
Topic: Offer from DISA to host F2F in Washington DC.
Chris: WHich week do people prefer?
Sept 9-13? 23-27?
(People mentioned conflicts in both)
TAG f2f, Nextware show week of 23-27th
Zakim, please excuse us
I will post this query to the email list. Please respond directly to me -- not the list.
[Meeting adjourned]
RRSAgent, what actions?
I see 5 action items:
ACTION: Chris, figure out how to get more members on IRC [1]
recorded in
ACTION: Editors: Rename D-AG0006 into AG-0006: PENDING [2]
recorded in
ACTION: DavidO: Send updated version of DAG0010 to the public list and say that it was accepted [PENDING] [3]
recorded in
ACTION: Chris (and Zulah): send proposed wording to list and take it to email [PENDING] [4]
recorded in
ACTION: Chris to bring up possibility of joint usage scenarios and glossary TF between WS WGs at next WS-CG meeting [5]
recorded in
RRSAgent, please excuse us
Present: 47
Apple Mike Brumbelow
AT&T Ayse Dilber
AT&T Mark Jones
BEA Systems David Orchard
ChevronTexaco Roger Cutler
Cisco Systems Inc Sandeep Kumar
Compaq Yin-Leng Husband
Computer Associates Igor Sedukhin
Contivo Dave Hollander
CrossWeave, Inc. Timothy Jones
DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology Mario Jeckle
DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology Hans-Peter Steiert
Digital Island Joseph Hui
Documentum Don Robertson
Hewlett-Packard Company Zulah Eckert
IBM Heather Kreger
Intel Corporation Sharad Garg
Intel Corporation Joel Munter
IONA Steve Vinoski
Ipedo Alex Cheng
Ipedo Srinivas Pandrangi
Macromedia Glen Daniels
MartSoft Corp. Jin Yu
Microsoft Corporation Allen Brown
Microsoft Corporation Henrik Nielsen
MITRE Corporation James Davenport
MITRE Corporation Paul Denning
Nokia Michael Mahan
Nortel Networks Abbie Barbir
Oracle Corporation Jeff Mischkinsky
Planetfred, Inc. Mark Baker
Rogue Wave Software Patrick Thompson
SAP Sinisa Zimek
SeeBeyond Technology Corp Alan Davies
Software AG Michael Champion
Sterling Commerce(SBC) Suresh Damodaran
Sun Microsystems, Inc. Chris Ferris
Sun Microsystems, Inc. Mark Hapner
Sybase, Inc. Himagiri Mukkamala
The Boeing Company Gerald Edgar
The Thomson Corporation Hao He
TIBCO Software, Inc. Scott Vorthmann
W. W. Grainger, Inc. Daniel Austin
W. W. Grainger, Inc. Tom Carroll
W3C Hugo Haas
Waveset Technologies Darran Rolls
webMethods, Inc. Prasad Yendluri
Regrets: 9
Carnegie Mellon University Katia Sycara
Compaq Kevin Perkins
DISA Marcel Jemio
Ericsson Nilo Mitra
France Telecom Shishir Garg
Hewlett-Packard Company Dorothea Beringer
Intalio Inc Bob Lojek
Sun Microsystems, Inc. Doug Bunting
Systinet Anne Thomas Manes
Absent: 15
Artesia Technologies Dipto Chakravarty
Cisco Systems Inc Krishna Sankar
EDS Mike Ballantyne
EDS Waqar Sadiq
IBM Jim Knutson
IONA Eric Newcomer
Macromedia Tom Jordahl
MartSoft Corp. Jun Chen
Rogue Wave Software David Noor
Software AG Nigel Hutchison
T-Nova Deutsche Telekom Innovationsgesellschaft Jens Meinkoehn
VeriSign, Inc. Michael Mealling
W3C David Booth
XQRL Inc. Tom Bradford
XQRL Inc. Daniela Florescu

Scribe: Michael Mahan  David Booth
Chair: Chris Ferris