Confirm scribe.
The following is a list of recent scribes (in order): Yaron Goland, Daniel Austin, Jim Hendler, Peter Furniss, Ed Peters, Greg Ritzinger, Leonard Greski
Approve minutes
March 2003, Face to face minutes: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/chor/3/03/F2fMinutes.html
25 March 2003 Con call minutes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2003Mar/att-0012/2003/2503-1.htm
Action Item Review
Write up use cases 2003/03/25: Yaron
Write up a use case of what he see the choreography group addressing
Discussion on submitted Use Cases
Glossary discussion
AOB.
Chairs: |
| |
Oracle | ||
Enigmatec | ||
|
| |
W3C Staff Contacts |
| |
|
| |
|
Members:
Choreology Ltd | |
Cisco Systems Inc | |
Commerce One | |
EDS | |
Hewlett-Packard | |
Hitachi, Ltd. | |
Intalio Inc. | |
IONA | |
IONA | |
National Computerization Agency | |
Nortel Networks | |
Novell | |
Oracle Corporation | |
Software AG | |
Sun Microsystems, Inc. | |
Sun Microsystems, Inc. | |
TIBCO Software | |
TIBCO Software | |
W. W. Grainger, Inc. | |
W. W. Grainger, Inc. | |
webMethods, Inc. | |
Progress Software | |
University of Maryland (Mind Lab) |
MChapman: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2003Mar/0272.html
Appointment of scribe
CM: scribe is carol
Action items to review
SRT: small business approve 2 sets of minutes f2f and march 28
SRT: anyone have a summary of use cases?
1 jim hendler 2 from martin 2 from david beddette 1 paul 2 monica 1
MM: need to make sure that Monica's 2 use cases picked up
SRT: Also need to correllate submitted with the ones from the F2F
SRT: Frank McCabe submitted patient doctor waiting room
SRT: we will need to segment use cases to understand what kind they are
RB: And all these use cases are supposed to be accumulated into the overall
requirements document? YES
Use case discussion
SRT: Next item discuss use cases
SRT: MC categorizing use cases clarifies what we want
DA: Lets just decide as a group, for our purposes what we mean
scenario use case "user scenario = group of use cases "
MC: That is upside down from how I was thinking about it
use cases usually talk about business domain issues
scenarios are more lower level, 1 use case can have more than 1
scenarios
DA: I was talking about Object O use case definition
MC The point is we just need to define our terms and stick with it
Terms should be first thing which goes into use case document
SRT: My use case is not user oriented , not really message exchange
pattern, would prefer to call it a choreographic pattern
basis of exchange one can have to form a choreography
one is a pattern oriented use case and one is a user oriented use case
DA: In uml use case is defined as user interacting with a system
with web services there is not always a human being at the other end
are you trying to separate the use cases based on whether user is
involved or not
MCha: +1 to what Daniel just said!
???: Actor could be human or machine anything external to the system
MC: uml use cases always talk about business problem , there is another level
more mechanical level involving callbacks
JD: some of use are interested in having a business justification
may want to suppport a general pattern , but may help to have a business
example of use of pattern
concerned that we can define arbitrary patterns without a concrete use
MC: +1 to jdart
DC: +1 to what John just said
MC: if we can't find a real world example then why do the tech oriented
use case
JD: message exchange pattern is so abstract that you don't immediately
see use need to be able to map it on to real world scenarios
SRT: Summarize previous conversation
MCha: I agree but want to expand need to include business case but also
technical case for WS standard for automating
how would a machine processable standard fit into the equation?
MCha: use cases talked about choreo but did not make it explicit how ws-
chor language would assist in implementation of use cases
SRT: I agree. This is all about composition and/or contract enforcement.
SRT: To summarize whats being asked for is business context to justify use
case and we also need to deal with those use cases with respect to what a
standard for chor will mean contract enforcement composition
*** ACTION: ALL actions required re-submit use cases with business context
Editor appointment for requirments document
DA: Suggestions for editor appointment: who has been an editor before .
Need to establish 2 mailing lists ws-chor editors and comment mailing list
ws-editors-comments commment mailing list editors mailing list online
place for editors call something for Hugo and yves to sort out .
MC: For comments could use bugzilla
one list for editing issues and one for public comments on a particular
document would send things to bugzilla
have to go thru disposition process for w3c
is that email list connected to bugzilla?
HH: don't know
YL does not know either
*** ACTION: HH/YL Check connection of mailing (public-ws-chor-commnents) lists to bugzilla
DA: Daniel says: need editor's mailing list, public comments
DC: Asked a couple of questions with comments (public-ws-chor-commnents) going to
bugzilla , will this auto create a record ?
DA: Also need editor's call set up
MC: Reported that mailing lists are automatically archived
DC: Who receives it, just editors
DA: anyone can send email, archived , public for editors to discuss
without putting everything on the main list
everyone will not get mailed for every issue
DA: process issue: should adopt issues resolution process being used
by Arch group they have a w3c issuse resolution process, that way we have way of
dealing with issues also we should decide to use xml spec dtd for all docs
there is a schema if you are brave enough to use it, just make sure docs are conformant
to latest xml spec language definition save later hassles for editing
SRT: I'll take lead from the wise
DA: one thing we can do to help ourselves is to take advantage free
license for xml spy build in tool for editng w3c doc
ask hugo to request license for group for tool
*** ACTION: Hugo to ask for XML Spy licences
*** ACTION: Yves/Hugo setup an editors ML
SRT: we need to sort out editorship of the requirements martin we had daniel from Grainger abbie
from nortel volunteer to edit requirements doc
MC: Yes, both worked together on ws-arch doc. For requirements phase 2 people who worked together
before is ideal
DA: What is realistic time for a first draft
MC: f2f june time frame , have a good draft for discussion then we don't have a solid offer for hosting
nothing final for hosting from Grainger
DA: have 1 week or 2 to look at it and have a doc ready for f2f in june
???: does doc include all use case work?
???: what is methodology for requ?
DA: It is iterative , in inception phase 6 months a lot of churn drafts
then goes into passive phase making changes based on comments as
needed a lot of work up front on use cases after that it dies down , then just
maintenance based on that thinking must do a lot of work on use cases and general
classes of requ irements. 2 sources of requirements use cases and requirments of more general
cross functional nature.
like arch must obey these standards, language, have certain interoperabityy
there is a coherence to this process and if we can all understand process
then we can do good job with ws-chor
DC: We would like to offers xml schema editing tool from excelon sure they would
be happy to donate licenses (XML Sylus). It does a lot of things including
bpm , xslt transform debugging ...
DA Everyone would be glad to look at it
*** ACTION: DC to send details to private list
Use case discussion continued
MM: My use cases are on mailing list now
(JD)??: In another work group editor and chair iterated got it down to a few use
cases that capture others for exampel web site mgmt use case emcompassing others
JH: Brainstorming then categorization JIM
SRT: Can JH send examples
JD: I've played around with doctor use case could generate all kinds of scenarios
good candidate for one that could be used for scenarios
patient has to negotiate for time date , receptionist consults doctor
JH: Web Ont Use cases and requirements doc is at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/
Last Call version due out tomorrow.
(note that WS chor will be asked to do a review of this doc...)
SRT: Do we have volunteers to walk thru use cases?
SRT: Doctor/Patient, Frank was originator of this but not on call
are any authors on line?
DB: will go through his use case originally sent to architecture group
international procurement exercise similar to many used in practice
company in detroit wants to outsource electr components for car
delivery of goods important buyer arranges for seller to pick them up
buyer seller have to cooperate for order pick up and delivery
make request to buyer to pick up agree when they picked up e
is an international choreography also must send out customs declaration
because it is internation must hold additional information, can have
different details in the message
MC: Davids use case at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2003Mar/0216.html ???: Martin can you recap what aspects of this choreo we should explore in this group
3 or more organizations participating as peers can adopt same choreo but detailed
content of message can vary 3 point choreo describes what goes right but must think
how to handle when things go wrong not delivered , message does not go thru
SRT: If you look at detroit buyer who is buying from korea and must send customs info
in your use case have you described the observable behaviour for 3 parties?
DB: You can not see inside for buyer or shipper we want to be able to re-use choreo in different
context , but interaction pattern is the same but detail is different
SRT: But interaction is not the same
DB: korean shipper sends 1 message with 2 documents
don't want them to be different if you think of all variations
*** POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEM
MC: This is a much bigger issue than the use cases, discuss it next week
DA: There is a well known solution in cases where you have different formats for docs abstract general doc
structure agnostic to actual format abstract general data structure then
MC: We should save this discussion for next week
SRT: That should be on the agenda next week to go into more detail on this
issue
*** POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEM
DA: Next week we should try to classify general groups of general requirements
SRT: Will come back to daniel separately for that to put on agenda
JD: The large issue we are punting the external internal issue , not
sure if good to punt on that
*** POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEM
MC: We need to discuss the issue of resuable choreographies and data formats
JD: does not object to deferring right now
SRT: It is on agenda for next week
JM: I would think the use cases will help to inform the internal/external (non ;-) issue
Glen: Definition of use case and usage scenario (see suggestion from HH)
JD: Schedule discussion of specific use case and make sure author is present
SRT: will take input from everyone for how to organize agenda for issues
Glossary
SRT: Glossary was submitted by monica from Sun
*** ACTION: MM to post gloassary document on publlic list for review
DA: A lot of things defined in ws overall doc, need to work with that
MC: propose changes or additions, not manage our own hugo how will we do the approval process ?
HH: There is an issue about glossary synchronization see how ws-description group is doing it.
ws architecture has own high level definitions they are commenting on definitions they don't like
there can be a ws-chor specific glossary and then integrated and resolve discrepancies
MC: Compile our own terms and then say Hugo can you put them into
bigger doc
HH: There are a bunch of defintioins but not maintained because delegated to this group, so owned by this group
*** ACTION: HH will take a look at monica's gloassary document
HH: comment on use case and scenarios and glossary ws-descr and ws arch argueing on which is detailed view
MC: Since we are talking about this again recommend we take the same conclusion and add this to ws glossary
*** ACTION: Hugo to dig up the meaning of use case and usage scenario
DA: have we banned the word orchestration ?
MC: yes for the moment
DA: we should point out why this is not there
MC: just put for orchestration see choreography
AOB
DA: Need to figure out f2f need to announce 8 wks before event
*** ACTION: CM will check with Sun about f2f
*** ACTION DC can check with sonic
DC: 2nd week of june is not possible for a few of us who are at JavaOne.
sun, sonic would be burlington close to boston
MC: In order to get 8 wk deadline need to know within a few weeks get back to
use soon
MC: Need to start on september for europe , kevin offered germany HD
(GR)?: I'm looking into Novell (MA) hosting too
MC: who is in S. France, yves?
CM: YES YES French riviera
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
*** ACTION: ALL actions required re-submit use cases with business context
*** ACTION: HH/YL Check connection of mailing (public-ws-chor-commnents) lists to bugzilla
*** ACTION: Hugo to ask for XML Spy licences
*** ACTION: Yves/Hugo setup an editors ML
*** ACTION: DC to send details to private list
*** ACTION: MM to post gloassary document on publlic list for review
*** ACTION: HH will take a look at monica's glossary document
*** ACTION: CM will check with Sun about F2F
*** ACTION DC can check with sonic for F2F
Summary of recorded actions (from IRC)
ACTION: Yves/Hugo to investigate on how to connect public-ws-chor-comments with bugzilla [1]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T21-41-40
ACTION: Hugo to ask for XML Spy licences [2]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T21-46-07
ACTION: Yves/Hugo setup an editors ML [3]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T21-46-18
ACTION: discuss the issue of resuable choreographies and data formats [4]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T22-12-37
ACTION: Hugo to dig up the meaning of use case and usage scenario [5]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T22-22-30
ACTION: carol will check with Sun about f2f [6]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T22-23-40
ACTION: hugo xml spy license [7]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T22-27-55