Minutes WS Choreography WG conference call 8 March 2005
IRC log: logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/03/08-ws-chor-irc
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Mar/att-0010/Agenda-03082005-1.txt
1. Role Call: Abbie, Anders, Gary, Nick, Tony, Yves, Steve
2. Scribe: Gary
3. Agenda changes:
Anders has a question to put on agenda: Information types and bundling etc
4. Minutes of last meeting:
SRT proposes to delay accepting the minutes from the f2f as they were only sent out yesterday
Editors to check the minutes to determine if there any clarity problems
5. Action item review:
1. ACTION: Martin to do UML diagram from scratch for CDL
IN PROGRESS
2. ACTION on Gary to follow-up with issuer Kohei on issue 1101
Gary has followed up and not heard from Koehi just yet -
IN PROGRESS
3. ACTION on Gary to follow-up with issuer (Kohei) on issue 1102
Gary has followed up and not heard from Koehi just yet
IN PROGRESS
4. ACTION: Martin to check Tony and Greg's resource commitments to editing
Tony 2 to 4, Greg 4 to 6 and Nick 2 to 4 hours
DONE
5. ACTION: Chairs (after previous action and/or in parallel) Check extra
resourcing from the WG
IN PROGRESS PENDING EDITORS CALL
6. ACTION: SRT Check 1027 for issues pertaining to identity
IN PROGRESS
7. ACTION: Add text in primer or spec to clarify participant relationship/role pertaining to issue 1027
IN PROGRESS
8. ACTION: Charlton will sanity check issue pertaining to issue 1008 and WSDL bindings (faults)
IN PROGRESS
9. ACTION: Log an issue for Nick/Martin to explore relaxing the requirement for using XPath as the sole expression language.
IN PROGRESS
10. ACTION: Chairs to talk with the XPath 2.0 WG to determine the direction
of three-valued logic and existential qualifiers
IN PROGRESS
11. ACTION: SRT to create a new issue about accessory pertaining to issue 1128.
IN PROGRESS
12. ACTION: SRT to rewrite the exit criteria.
IN PROGRESS
13. ACTION: Editors to develop schedule to verify whether they can
produce doc by end of May.
DEPENDENT ON EDITORS CALL
14. ACTION: chairs to respond to issue raiser for closed issues
STANDING ITEM
15. ACTION: Editors to deliver the doc by end of May
DUPLICATE of 13
16. ACTION: Steve to ask Anders and Monica to address issue pertaining to 1092
Anders to take Charlton's text to meeting and to return with proposal
PARTIALLY DONE
17. ACTION: Gary to seek clarification on issue 1003 from Kohei
DONE WG needs to review email from Kohei: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Mar/0005.html
18. ACTION: Nick to contact Anders to determine if this is still an
issue (1079)
REPLACED ITEM WITH ACTION: Steve to put together text related to issue 1079 and send to Ander's for approval
19. ACTION: Steve to learn about this issue from Nick for the Primer (issue 1079)
IN PROGRESS
6. Summary of F2F:
SRT to give brief summary of f2f
7. Anders question (see above):
How do you handle information document bundling in CDL information types
MIME could be used to package the message elements
Nick recommends SOAP1.2 as the packaging layer
Nick suggests xop, mtom
Steve asks Anders to send a concrete example as steve is doing example all week.
Tony suggests having info type for bundle and using tokens to extract relevant part of message
Yves points to http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-soap12-mtom-20050125/
SRT references issue 1128, accessing and modifying lists/arrays, as being relevant to this topic
Ander: if you use mtom- what would the information type refer to?
Yves - only defined by URI to indicate support for the feature this is a good link for mtom, xop:
http://www.mnot.net/blog/2004/02/14/xop
mtom/xop is a recommendation since January
8. Issues requiring discussion:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=967
??? http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part0.html#L3360 ??? - not sure why this is here?
ACTION: Yves will sort out a list of normative references
A WS-CDL processor MUST ensure that the document is correct before
processing it. The correctness may involve XML well-formedness as well
as semantic ;checks, such as unicity of Variable definitions, of a
single root Choreography, etc.
ACTION: define what is meant by correctness - see above
RESOLVED WILL FIXED - FILL IN CONFOMANCE SECTION
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=968
SRT: do we need MIME type
Yves: we may surf a CDL document from a web server, then needs MIME type
ACTION: Yves to define the MIME type
RESOLVED WILL FIX - Yves will sort out MIME type
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=971
SRT: Major editorial thing to do - suggests assign to editors. Editors should then raise resourcing issue if necessary
RESOLVE MIGHT FIX - Editors to look at it first and then maybe wg member does work and submits
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=973
ACTION: Charlton to talk to submitter to provide clarity of issue
PENDING CLARITY FROM SUBMITTER
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=996
Tony thinks that you need to have some form of scoping of the exchanges related to multiple responses
Nick: putting choice inside interaction makes it a sub-choreography
Tony: usecase could be sending in order and getting back more than one response
Tony: WSDL1.1 cannot specify more than one normal response, but WSDL2.0 can
Nick: how will this work when binding to programming languages
Tony: that is assuming a particular style of implementation
Nick: if we want to relax current constraint, that should not be a problem
Straw poll suggests that 3 to 2 in favour of won't fix
Tony: if we are going to be bound to WSDL2.0, then we should support multiple responses
Issue should be left open for now
LEFT OPEN
9. AOB:
Tony suggests the group looks at the Barros paper at: http:
http://www.bptrends.com/deliver_file.cfm?fileType=publication&fileName=03%2D05%20WP%20WS%2DCDL%20Barros%20et%20al%2Epdf
Highlights include the following:
"Lack of comprehensive formal grounding. While WS-CDL borrows some terminology from picalculus,
there is no comprehensive mapping from WS-CDL to pi-calculus or any other formalism. Even if a
formalization of WS-CDL was undertaken in the future, it would be an a posteriori exercise rather
than an a priori effort to ensure the coherence and consistency of the language."
"Whether or not WS-CDL becomes a de jure standard and is adopted by a wide user base, its development
would have been instrumental in promoting and advancing the notion of service choreography as a basis
for service-oriented development."
Next f2f: Abbie offered to host in Maidenhead, Sun would like to host in London
Meeting closed:
Summary of Actions:
1. ACTION: Martin to do UML diagram from scratch for CDL
2. ACTION on Gary to follow-up with issuer Kohei on issue 1101
Gary has followed up and not heard from Koehi just yet -
3. ACTION on Gary to follow-up with issuer (Kohei) on issue 1102
Gary has followed up and not heard from Koehi just yet
4. ACTION: Chairs (after previous action and/or in parallel) Check extra
resourcing from the WG
5. ACTION: SRT Check 1027 for issues pertaining to identity
6. ACTION: Add text in primer or spec to clarify participant relationship/role pertaining to issue 1027
7. ACTION: Charlton will sanity check issue pertaining to issue 1008 and WSDL bindings (faults)
8. ACTION: Log an issue for Nick/Martin to explore relaxing the requirement for using XPath
as the sole expression language.
9. ACTION: Chairs to talk with the XPath 2.0 WG to determine the direction of three-valued
logic and existential qualifiers
10. ACTION: SRT to create a new issue about accessory pertaining to issue 1128.
11. ACTION: SRT to rewrite the exit criteria.
12. ACTION: Editors to develop schedule to verify whether they can produce doc by end of May.
13. ACTION: chairs to respond to issue raiser for closed issues
14. ACTION: Steve to ask Anders and Monica to address issue pertaining to 1092
Anders to take Charlton's text to meeting and to return with proposal
15. ACTION: Steve to learn about this issue from Nick for the Primer (issue 1079)
16. ACTION: Steve to put together text related to issue 1079 and send to Ander's for approval
17. ACTION: Yves will sort out a list of normative references [1]
18. ACTION: define what is meant by correctness - see above [2]
19. ACTION: Yves to define the MIME type [3]
20. ACTION: Charlton to talk to submitter to provide clarity of isue [4]
21. ACTION: WG needs to review email from Kohei: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Mar/0005.html
Chairs to put on agenda to discuss further