W3C Staff Contacts
SeeBeyond Technology Corporation
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
University of Maryland (Mind Lab)
Ravi Byakod from Intalio volunteered to scribe.
The following is a list of recent scribes(inorder): Martin Chapman, Steve Ross-Talbot, Monica Martin, Nick Kavantzas, Ed Peters, Anthony Fletcher, Jeff Michkinsky, Dinesh Shahane, Greg Ritzinger, Ed Peters, David Burdett, Ivana Trickovic, Ugo Corda, Assaf Arkin, MonicaMartin, Carol McDonald, NickKavantzas, Tony Fletcher, MayilrajKrishnan, Francis McCabe, Jeff Mischkinsky,David Burdett ,John Dart, Monica Martin,Tony, Fletcher, Jim Hendler, Kevin Liu, TonyFletcher, Jon Dart, David Burdett,Ed Peters, Greg Ritzinger, Monica Martin, LenGreski, Jean-Jacques Dubray,Monica Martin, Mayilraj Krishnan, FrancisMcCabe, Michael Champion, AbbieBarbir, David Burdett, Jon Dart, Carol McDonald,Yaron Goland, Leonard Greski,Ed Peters, Greg Ritzinger, Daniel Austin, PeterFurniss, Jim Hendler
Minutes were approved subject to date change in title of minutes.
NO GENERAL ACTION ITEMS TO REVIEW
Steve: Issues process is dogging us for sometime, we need to get a handle on it today.
5. Standing tracking items (a section designed to ensure that longer running items are properly tracked)
Requirements – outstanding items
ACTION:Daniel to look though document and see whichrequirements we captured so far regarding transactions. (NO PROGRESS,1021, 1028, 1111, 1118, 1125, 1202, CLOSED)
Steve: Issue of transactions has no progress YET - if Daniel does not turn up in the next meeting - chair to strike it OFF from the list.
Martin: the issue has been CLOSED
Monica: Daniel has been endorsed as the SUN representative
ACTION: Editors of the requirements are directed to look at the issues list and filter each issue in a similar way to the filtering method used at the F2F. To be taken into account at editors meeting in November. ( IN PROGRESS, 1021, 1028,1111, 1118, 1125, 1202, 1209,0106)
Requirements doc feedback - sent to named people - had decided to tackle the edits at the F2F - Abbie has issued the edited doc to the editors only
NEW ACTION: Requirements Editors – Review requirements doc by Jan 13th including issues list review against document. (0106)
Requirements Document Feedback
We plan to tackle this next call (13th January).
Issue tracking (progress/review)
Steve: requirements doc has taken a long time to get to the current stage and in terms of planning it will take 2 meetings to do requirements doc and issues list. Doing either one individually will take one meeting each.
Martin: How to tackle issues? - if it has an easy solution then tackle it, if not shove them back to the submitter.
Martin: With respect to requirements document the editors should go thru the issue list and if they matter to requirements - tackle them and others stay outstanding - If no one wants to champion/own the issue then drop it - at the chairs discretion.
With respect to requirements doc - editors go thru the issues present the document back to members and request for moving forward to publication - Abbie to send via email the corrected document.
Steve/Martin - let us see some email traffic to manage the process to get the requirements doc reviewed quickly and published - if we cannot make it by 13th (which is tight) then we inform the members as such.
ACTION: Need to go thru the issues DB next time – Martin (0106)
ACTION: With respect to requirements doc - Abbie to send via email the corrected document as soon as available. (0106)
ACTION: Steve/Martin - let us see some email traffic to manage the process to get the requirements doc reviewed quickly and published - if we cannot make it by 13th (which is tight) then we inform the members as such. (0106)
Specification Editors report
Plan after the F2F is to tackle the specification in whatever state it is in - present that to members - ideally by 20th Jan - may slip
David: no further work being done as he was playing phone tag with Nick to decide what to do next, cannot tell anything until he gets back in touch Nick
ACTION: Task Nick/David to come up with the what to do next by 27th (0106)
ACTION: David to redo Visio diagrams in UML (action from F2F) (0106)
6. Face to face report
Martin gave a quick over view on f2f:
Steve: Possibly have a closer liaison with ws-caf . Further work to be done to understand how this should happen and benefits. Will pick this up later.
8. Hot topics
Transactions contribution from Choreology. Word Document
Steve: Tony could you frame this around why choreology sent this in and why is it important?
Tony: Basically put out some reqs on transactions some time ago and are included in this doc.
It is a biz decision as to what is included in a Transaction (tx) and not, what a tx spans - generally do small little steps each being a tx on its own, or a group of steps in one tx.
I have tried to show here a tx begins and end and the workings of it the next bit explains the tx mapping
David: definitely took Tony's idea when they were doing the model - identified the need for taking action after a tx completion successfully.
We need to have groups of messages in diff choreographies to be put into one transaction
Tony - the messages being put into a single tx are not arbitrary - it is the tool which will identify the proper msgs and if you went to a traditional buyer/supplier choreography - I want a tx between the buyer and distributor - propagated to the supplier - this is one tx with 3 parties. we could do this a 2 choreographies which effectively do individual txs
This discussion went into more technical discussion - someone pointed out that it was a bananas discussion
Steve: Tony how do you want to play this one? as some activity has taken place since you sent this document
Tony: Thanks for the feedback and if anyone has any discussions or any conversations - please make sure that people are happy with what I am trying to do - the concepts - if not : send an email to me or David
This is an addition to the actual syntax of the language and any comments are welcome. I quite did not understand the model and if the next version is in UML I will try and see how my contribution can be modeled into it.
Steve: ok that is how we will leave it for now and see how it goes in the next 3-4 weeks
NEW ACTION: Steve - bananas calculus to be written up by the end of the month (figure out to get it written up). (0106)
Steve: Next hot topic is choreography and orchestrations must be defined in context .
Monica: we briefly touched on it I think at the F2F - no one has notes.
ACTION: Chairs to re-introduce the topic of choreography and orchestration at the next conf call (0106)
Monica: SUN will be happy to sponsor the meeting after the France's one - people will have to have sign an NDA (probably generic) to have internet access a corporate policy - Steve and Martin to figure that out
Steve: W3C decided NOT to join WSI . It was reported that Martin and Steve felt that there was certainly an uneasy feeling that the chair and members were not consulted in deciding NOT to join the WSI at a previous W3C Web Services Coordination conference call.
One of the reasons is - WSI has a diff set of IP rules
Steve was requested to email to all chairs of Web Services activities requesting them to ping all the members as to what they want out of the liaison with WSI - what is the benefit?
Steve: If everyone on this call wants it - we can take it back to the coordination group. The focus should be "What can we achieve individually, corporate wise as a group that we cannot do now by this liaison with WSI". I need the responses by the next coordination call which is on the 20th.
Monica: We could provide relevant use cases that could provide input to WS-I requirements to help them understand what profiles may be needed in the future or input into existing or future profile development already in work.
NEW ACTIONS SUMMARY
ACTION: Steve: - issues list - we will come back at the next meeting for the issues in the Bugzilla.
ACTION: Requirements Editors – Review requirements doc by Jan 13th including issues list review against document.
ACTION: Need to go thru the issues DB next time - Martin
ACTION: With respect to requirements doc - Abbie to send via email the corrected document as soon as available.
ACTION: Steve/Martin - let us see some email traffic to manage the process to get the requirements doc reviewed quickly and published - if we cannot make it by 13th (which is tight) then we inform the members as such.
ACTION: Task Nick/David to come up with the what to do next by 27th
ACTION: David to redo Visio diagrams in UML (action from F2F).
ACTION: Steve - bananas calculus to be written up by the end of the month (figure out to get it written up)
ACTION: Chairs to re-introduce the topic of choreography and orchestration at the next conf call