WS Architecture Teleconference
18 Sep 2003

See also: IRC log


Present: Arnold, Barbir, Booth, Bunting, Champion, Chapman, Eckert, Garg, Haas, He, Hollander, Jeckle, Kumar, Mahan, McCabe, Orchard, Sycara

Regrets: ?

Chair: MikeC & DaveH

Scribe: MarioJ


Approval of Minutes

Scribe: No changes requested.
... No objections to approve minutes.
... Minutes approved without objection.

Action Item Review

Martin: to kick off discuss on mailing list re: Are Semantics, Actions, Acts, Tasks, Goals all needed?

Scribe: action item still pending.
... Has also been a topic of the choreography f2f.
... Action to Chair to put it on the f2f agenda.

<dbooth> ACTION: Chair to put semantics on the F2F agenda

Katia: with Daniel to harvest from WS-Policy, WS-Security and other real world specifications. Make sure abstract terminology in WSArch maps to those specifications.

Scribe: Progress continues.
... Couple of exchanges with David.

Katia: Formalize some aspects of the spaghetti diagram.

Scribe: Some results sent this morning.
... WG members should take a look at it and are invited to provide feedback.
... Katia requests some guidance on coping with inconsistencies (header, msg. content).

MikeM: Send pointers to definitive UML diagrams to editors list

Scribe: action done.
... Mike C&M: Champion header, intermediary, architectural significance - SOAPunderspecifies this ... WSDL ignores it (why?) ... refine types of intermediaries ... end to end message path architecture.. Can/Should
... progressing.
... Feedback welcome!

MikeC: Respond to the mailing list thread as to why we removed URIfrom the ur-Trout definition of "Web service"

Scribe: still pending.
... Some discussions on when to call a standard "proprietary". Strictly speaking SOAP/1.1 is proprietary.
... But it could make sense to include it since this specifications may tackle important areas.

DBooth: 1) group could decide to work on this or not before declaring victory, or 2) someone could propose a list of "standards" to include

Hugo: Suggests to set up a poll on this question.

Scribe: Since the environment is so dynamic it could make sense to put it into a separate document.

DaveO: Customers expect us to do this. Such a document would be very helpfull to them.

Decisson: Straw poll will be set up on putting this into a non-normative appendix of the spec.

<dbooth> We have already witnessed how contentious and politically charged such a list would be. I am concerned that this would be a political feeding frenzy. If the group had to reach consensus about what to say about each spec, we would waste huge amounts of time.

<fgm> +1

<dbooth> The word "quagmire" comes to mind.

<DaveH> \foo
... quagmire - the parent of the ur trout

Scribe: http://www.xml-acronym-demystifier.org provides such a list which could be worth to harvest from.

Preliminary F2F agenda

Scribe: Discussion about the usage scenario document in WS chor.
... Some working group members express their desire to synchronize use cases with WS chor.

<DaveH> +1
... simplicity in use cases is key to them being used!!!

... Security Framework (Mike M., Katia ...)

<fgm> Having an OWL version of the WSA is way cool

Scribe: After hours: Editors' working session. Lots of loose ends to prioritize,
... assign; a todo list to update.
... At both days of the f2f.
... Intermediaries (Mike M. and Mike C.)
... Discovery (David Booth)
... Reliable Messaging
... Usage Scenarios
... Editors sesssion.


Scribe: Formalization
... OWL stuff


Scribe: editor's working session.

<fgm> gotta drop out folks. See you next week

Scribe: Discussion inside WSD on what to call an "operation" continued without consensus.
... No additional issues.
... Logistic issues
... There is a chance to attend the f2f by phone.
... The will be no wired network access.
... Bring your network cards.

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Chair to put semantics on the F2F agenda

Minutes formatted by David Booth's perl script: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
$Date: 2003/12/11 17:20:49 $