See also: IRC log
Chair: Mike Champion, Dave Hollander
Scribe: Doug Bunting
<dbooth> If zakim didn't recognize you, you can add yourself to zakim's database: http://www.w3.org/1998/12/bridge/info/name.php3
<dougb> dougb will act like scribe and visa versa due to conscription
Scribe: ACTION: mchampion to update minutes to change "dougm" to "unknown"
Scribe: see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-arch/2002Nov/0011.html
MikeC: runs through the existing outline.
All: Little discussion of first day. On to the second day.
UgoMike: [This is Ugo and Mike for those on the phone :-] (No wait...) Quick discussion of pub / sub and asynchronous as separate topics.
DaveH: mentions message queues also seem to fit somewhere within these topics.
MikeC: wonders if all are related, possibly different levels of implementation detail? [unsure of last paraphrase]
FrankM: wonders if we want to cover pre/post-conditions and sequencing in our document.
MikeC: stuffs this into an open slot then describes the conceptual background for the arch document and its organization.
Chairs: Frank's presentation / discussion will likely happen on Friday.
Scribe: ACTION: Frank M to do a quick, informal presentation of this topic during the f2f (along the lines of leading a discussion).
All: Some offline comments about finalizing Choreography WG Charter while 'they' are not on the call.
Hugo: notes the charter will be forwarded to the AC Forum prior to our f2f. Moot by the time we get together.
MikeC: wonders if time slot on Friday should be used to help Hugo with his presentation to AC Forum.
Hugo: believes he's doing the presentation but is not yet sure. Would like help, ensure he doesn't just make things up.
Scribe: ACTION: Reword Friday Choreography slot to be "decide what WSA WG would like to tell the AC representatives"
JeffM: asks if Hugo will be representing WG position or just doing a (random?) presentation.
Hugo: says he'll be talking about WS Activity and where we're going. He will cover our group and Choreography in at least some detail.
Scribe: ACTION: Hugo to determine his exact role and requirements to fill that role prior to Friday slot.
Frank: would prefer slot to be kept in the morning as he'll leave a bit early.
MikeC: says it will start at 10:50 and should end by lunch.
Scribe: Link to feature work: http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part1.html#extensibility
DaveH: notes this topic comes up often in the CG. Sounds good to Mike as well.
All: Question about covering during overlapping time frame with Desc group.
Scribe: ACTION: Chairs to make time for this on Wednesday and check with Glen about his ability to present in opened slot.
Chairs: Management discussion may move a bit later due to this shift.
Igor: notes this topic covers things of interest for the overall architecture and requests it is covered early in the f2f.
MikeC: agrees to leave it well enough alone.
... talks a bit about Issues list and process.
DaveH: notes we probably won't get to this area of this agenda. Will always be used as filler material in any meeting.
Scribe: see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Nov/0031.html
Jeff: explains "activities" wording as we decide whether Hugo's suggestions are friendly amendments.
Hugo: knew this comes from existing specifications but would prefer to leave it out. Not too hung up on his wording.
Jeff: asks "which would be more controversial?"
Unknown: choices are 1) Remove activity section and redistribute bullets elsewhere (nuking last couple as being "solution" level 2) leave as is.
Jeff: says major concern was reflection of / alignment with terminology in existing specification.
DaveH: wonders if "activities" could be moved under composition.
Eric: notes its possible to specify it as a separate topic for
scoping of work.
... comments on web services joining activities.
DaveH: suggests an activity might be a "unit of work".
Eric: Friendly amendment, "scope of work".
Unknown: In any recursion, get down to an atomic level. In this case, that atomic item is an activity.
JeffM: proposal, eliminate activities as separate item. Add "activities - nesting and scoping rules" under "composition".
FrankM: wonders if nesting and composition is at any possible
level, not necessarily related to atomic activities.
... Ontology issue: What is the meaning of "scope of an activity"?
All: some wondering about whether this is a topic for consideration by the proposed WG
Hugo: originally proposed removing "activities" because it all comes back to composition.
DaveH: avoiding description of internal behaviour
... suggesting amendment is a good idea.
All: wonder what level of amendments we're at.
... choice 1: move notion of activity to be a bullet under composition, maybe add scoping rules (/ nesting?) there too. No, not nesting...
Ugo: WSCI def'n of activity: Activities may be atomic or complex. Choreography relates activities temporally and recursively. [or something like that]
Jeff: notes his motion starts from Hugo's original proposal.
All: Some discussion of various meanings of "activity" in terms of their size.
Scribe: ACTION: Jeff M to make consensus changes (Hugo's proposal, movement of activities and scoping bullets around).
FrankM: asks about Turing completeness point. Consensus we're explicitly leaving this to the working group. Should the charter be that explicit?
DaveH: thinks this is like reminding proposed WG to breath. General
thought seems to lean towards silence on topic in the charter. Issue will
... says Turing completeness is a feature of choreography rather than a scoping issue.
JeffM: reads his updated "composition" section of proposed Charter.
DaveH: moves to forward this to W3M, our advice to use this revised version.
JeffM: mentions schedule.
Hugo: wonders if anyone feels that strongly about it.
MikeC: thinks we're filling a slot in the template and will leave details to W3M.
Hugo: notes schedule is slightly unrealistic.
All: General agreement with fast start.
Scribe: ACTION: Jeff M amend proposed charter to read "December" for chartering timeframe.
Jeff: Process question: Will AC vote on this issue.
Hugo: talking about WS Activity in general. He probably will not talk for this WG. Notes the AC Forum will discuss things provided to the committee for review.
DaveH: Vote will likely complete via email but may be opened during
the Forum meeting.
... General confidence in having discussion at the meeting!
All: resolution: General consensus for forwarding revised charter
... Hearing none: SO RESOLVED
Scribe: ACTION: From Eric: Chairs to forward revised charter to W3M and encourage its distribution ASAP (in advance of AC meeting).
Jeff: Question: Who should do the actual sending? 1) will send
revised version to w3m
... 2) separately, encouraging the W3M to do the AC forwarding ASAP.
DaveH: notes W3M will make the rest of the changes!
Scribe: ACTION -8
... ACTION: Jeff M to send revised charter to the group and Steve, Michael and Hugo. Will include words indicating above resolution (support of the group).
... ACTION: Chairs to encourage W3M to forward this revised charter to the AC ASAP (in advance of AC meeting).
Hugo: notes Jonathan has said Description group will leave this to
... Further, Description group won't muddy these waters.
Scribe: ACTION: Hugo will forward David O's email to WS-Security. (Complete)
Hugo: summarizes their responses: 2 of 4 issues handled just fine.
... one problem: avoiding rewriting when moving things into packaged message
Doug: suggests forwarding use case from Chris.
Hugo: suggests waiting for Chris since it was his use case.
MikeC: wonders what timeframe will limit our response.
... specifically: can we wait for f2f?
Scribe: ACTION: Chairs to contact David Falside asking about required timing of our response. Hugo to help with words.
Chairs: We'll commit to a response by XMLP teleconference next Wednesday. May need to fall back to email discussion...
Scribe: ACTION -12
... ACTION: Chairs to contact David Fallside asking about required timing for our response.
All: As a group, we don't seem to grok Mark Baker's repsonse.
... Possible Mark is getting at issue 390 or something else.
Scribe: ACTION: Hugo to respond to Mark, suggesting he respond to XMLP group as an individual.
MikeC: summarizes that WSA WG will respond to just one of 4 issue resolutions from XMLP WG.
Scribe: David Booth: suggests doing "Features" presentation (from
Glen) just before lunch on Wednesday.