Web Services Architecture Working Group
17-October- meeting minutes

Working Group home page · Meeting records



AT&T Mark Jones
BEA Systems David Orchard
Boeing Company Gerald Edgar
ChevronTexaco Roger Cutler
Contivo Dave Hollander

Daimler-Chrysler Mario Jeckle

EDS Waqar Sadiq
Ericsson Nilo Mitra
Hewlett-Packard Company Yin-Leng Husband
Hewlett-Packard Company Zulah Eckert
IBM Chris Ferris
MITRE Corporation Paul Denning
Nortel Networks Abbie Barbir
Oracle Corporation Jeff Mischkinsky
Progress Colleen Evans
SeeBeyond Technology Corp Ugo Corda
Software AG Michael Champion
Sun Microsystems, Inc. Doug Bunting
Thompson Corporation Hao He
TIBCO Software, Inc. Scott Vorthmann
W. W. Grainger, Inc. Tom Carroll
W3C David Booth
W3C Hugo Haas


Apple, Mike Brumbelow

AT&T Ayse Dilber

Carnegie Mellon University Katia Sycara
Cisco Sandeep Kumar
Computer Associates Igor Sedukhin
Fujitsu Frank McCabe
IONA Eric Newcomer
Ipedo Srinivas Pandrangi
Macromedia Glen Daniels
Nokia Michael Mahan
SAP Sinisa Zimek
SeeBeyond Technology Corp Alan Davies
Sterling Commerce(SBC) Suresh Damodaran
W. W. Grainger, Inc. Daniel Austin
Sybase Himagiri Mukkamala
webMethods, Inc. Prasad Yendluri


See agenda posted by the Chair.

Detailed minutes

1. Assign scribe.

Mario is the lucky minute taker for this week's telcon.

2. Scribe assigned (Mario Jeckle)

3. Last two weeks' telecon minutes approved

Change minutes of last week to ask the CG for guidance regarding 
SOAP's attachment feature.

3. Review of Action items.

4. Status reports:

Management Task Force: nothing to report

David: Task Forces should not work longer on one specific topic.
Concern is the danger of silently establishing an unsanctioned working group.
But, don't worry for the moment.

Hugo: +1

5. Publication status / deadlines

Requirements document has been published as a working draft

Hugo: Next week WG should finalize document.
Nov 5: Doc should be sent to the director for approval.
Oct 31 publication of WD.
This will enable us to get our documents published before the AC meeting.
If we will have some refinement regarding the choreography stuff we 
will not be able to get our documents published.
If the moratorium ends at the begin of December we could publish another
version of our docs.

Publish both, the architecture document and the glossary.

<h3>6. Reviewing XMLP Specs</h3>
Hugo: Three Comments have been sent to the mailinglist.
Doug: Group should decide if additional text is necessary.
Change the wording from "I" to "we" since comments are a product 
of the whole WG.

Should the CG be involved when working with another group?
(Consensus:) Involve CG to ask XMLP to create a concrete implementation of
 an attachment feature instead of just an abstract one.

(Action Item:) Mark will draft a few sentences stating this.

MIME content header.
Content location header provides information available also elsewhere.
(Action Item:) Doug will propose changed wording concerning reference 

(Action Item to the group:) Find a home for a "best practices" section 
within the current document or create a new doc

Hugo will put a couple of sentences into our response stating that 
explaining motivations would be appreciated.

David will make a proposal about best practices applicable to formulate 

7. Choreography

Discussion on terminology:
???:Proposal not to focus on specific words of the terminology.
???:+1. Focus on the meaning rather than on the names.
(Consensus:) Group should take glossary more seriously.

Dave: The way of specifying the order of message exchanges between 
two or more nodes. It may or may not be Turing-complete.
Choreography can be perceived between multiple nodes.
Choreography languages that are merely designed as interface description 
languages are normally nor Turing-complete.
Languages capable of describing a whole business process in a way that 
might be executable normally are.

Talking about message often directly leads to workflow stuff.

David: We should not mention the term "Turing-complete" within the spec.

(Consensus:) WSA-WG will focus on messages and exchange patterns.

Should transactions be addressed? And if so which style of transactions 
(compensation vs. roll-back)?

Lengthy discussion ... will be continued via the mailinglist.

Summary of new action items


Chair: Mike Champion <mike.champion@softwareag-usa.com>
Scribe: Mario Jeckle