Minutes WS Choreography WG conference call 26 July 2005
IRC Log: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-ws-chor-irc#T19-15-57
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Jul/att-0024/agenda_20050726-1.txt
1. Roll Call:
-------------
Charlton Barreto, Steve Ross-Talbot, Martin Chapman, Greg Ritzinger, Yves Lafon, Monica Martin Gary Brown, Abbie Barbir
2. Scribe:
----------
Gary Brown
3. Agenda Changes:
-------------------
None
4. Minutes:
------------
19th July minutes http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2005Jul/att-0010/minutes_20050719_-_1.txt
Says "12th July" should say "19th July"
APPROVED
5. Action item review:
-----------------------
1. ACTION: Martin to do UML diagram from scratch for CDL
Schedules after CR`
IN PROGRESS
2. ACTION: chairs to respond to issue raiser for closed issues
STANDING ITEM
Yves note that we don't care for internal changes
3. ACTION - LOG ISSUE FOR ITEM 16 [Editors to reword section on Relationships to be a section
on Interoperability (same content)]
DONE
4. ACTION: EDITORS TO IMPLEMENT 1092 RESOLUTION AND CORRECT 6/27/2005 SPECIFICATION DRAFT.
DONE
5. ACTION: MONICA/BUSINESS ANALYSTS NEEDS - WHAT ARE THEY? - MONICA TO ELABORATE
DONE
6. ACTION: SRT/ADD ENTERPRISE DOMAIN EXAMPLE FOR PRIMER.
IN PROGRESS
7. ACTION: charlton to propose wording on finalise and async choreos [2]
DONE
8. ACTION: Close 1176 as wontfix
DONE
9. ACTION: Close out 1001 and 1003 and cross check with editors
DONE
10. ACTION: close out issue 957
DONE
11. ACTION: Editors to incorporate updated exit criteria into the specification
IN PROGRESS
12. ACTION: martin to update issue 1496 in bugzilla to mark resolved fixed and close out
DONE
13. ACTION: martin to update issue 966 as resolved fixed in bugzilla
DONE
14. ACTION: reopen 1086, add editorial changes, and mark it editorial
DONE
Editors to ensure that all items on action review are in the document by the end of the week
6. Issues:
----------
Issue 1166
Charltons proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Jul/0018.html
Comments from Gary: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Jul/0019.html
Comments from Monica: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Jul/0023.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Jul/0022.html
Yves: think it may be both, as if a choreo is completed, then you may "forget" that it was part of the choreo
Charlton: only thing is that it introduces the "free state" condition
Martin: use 'instance-unknown' instead of 'unknown' for choreo status
Charltoni: "A Choreography either not in an Enabled State, or in an otherwise indeterminiate state, enters the InstanceUnknown State."
Martin: does not see need to amend choreo lifeline, as only related to status function
Charlton: believes status needs to be defined in choreo lifeline section
Steve: choreo lifeline relates to known choreo, so agrees with Martin
Charlton: But if we use a status, yet not describe it anywhere?
Martin: choreo lifeline section does not actually say how choreos are enabled
Steve: function sits outside of the lifecycle of the choreo
Charlton: will add language to function section
Charlton: second item relates to all enclosed choreos will be completed
Nicks view: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Jul/0025.html
Charlton: What do you think Gary?
Nick's rationale for success is so that finalizers are installed
Charlton: I'm not certain that subchoreos' installation of finalizers impacts the enclosing choreo's installatin of finalizers
Gary: Proposed solution for subchoreo completion: as in Nicks email, to add 'successful' in the relevant locations
Gary: Primer should provide guidance on how to deal with prematurely completed sub-choreos
Monica: change instanceId to choreoInstanceId
Monica: can clarify concurrent activities statement
Charlton: Monica's wording is fine regarding the concurrent activities wording
Charlton: what r your thoughts on collisions?
Charlton: i think the proper use of channels and roles take care of this
Charlton: I agree with Steve that the proper use of channels and roles address this
Gary: Primer needs to deal with 'interference' issues where-ever it may occur
Charlton: Proposed text for sub-issue #1 of 1166: In Section 5.3.1, "...'closed' or 'instance-unknown'. The 'instance-unknown' status is encountered when this function is invoked when the choreography has not been enabled. The other valid transitions of the choreography status are outlined in Section 5.7, Choreography Life-line." (with no language added to Section 5.7).
Charlton: Proposed text for sub-issue #2 of 1166: In Section 5.7, "When a Choreography completes, all uncompleted enclosed Choreographies will automatically be successfully completed."
Charlton: Proposed text for sub-issue #2 of 1166: In Section 5.7, "When a Choreography completes, all uncompleted enclosed Choreographies will automatically be successfully completed."
Charlton: Proposed text for sub-issue #1 of 1166: In Section 5.3.1, "...'closed' or 'instance-unknown'. The 'instance-unknown' status is encountered when this function is invoked when the choreography has not been enabled. The other valid transitions of the choreography status are outlined in Section 5.7, Choreography Life-line." (with no language added to Section 5.7).
Charlton: Proposed text for sub-issue #2 of 1166: In Section 5.7, "When a Choreography completes, all uncompleted enclosed Choreographies will automatically become successfully completed."
Issue 1166 APPROVED WITH PREVIOUS AMENDMENTS (see above)
NEW ACTION: Mark 1166 as Resolved Later and mark it as editorial
Issue 1086 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1086
Steve: editors need to commit to this issue being done
Greg: if I get pen this week, then possible
Martin: Editors need to organize themselves to clear the remaining issues
Issue 967 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=967
QA Feedback: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2005Jul/0012.html
Charlton: will do 1166 before the end of the week
Steve: two implementations, so believes there is enough clarity for implementors
Martin: comments on conformance section relevant - Yves will reword
Steve: do we need a glossary?
Martin: No - what other spec has a glossary
Steve: as long as conformance sorted out, rest is not a concern
7. Preparing for CR:
---------------------
Martin: call for implementation period?
Steve: Want to move to PR by end of year
Martin: end of October/November
Martin: four months for implementations
Yves: Might want full month to take care of issues arising from implementation
Steve: if we get to the stage of meeting the exit criteria, then this will also satisfy requirement for implementations
Steve: we have now met all requirements since completing 1166
charlton greg, why don't we have yves pass you the pen tomorrow then you can pass me the pen on thu?
Martin: need to think about features at risk, as we will only be able to remove features (if implementation problems) if they have been raised now
Steve: only substantive change is 1166
Martin: what level of depth for reporting on changes?
Steve: if we did a doc outlining the CR requirements discussion points, is that suffient?
Yves: yes, think so
8. AOB:
--------
None
9. Next meeting
---------------
2nd August 2005
SUMMARY OF ACTION ITEMS
-----------------------
1. ACTION: Martin to do UML diagram from scratch for CDL
Schedules after CR`
IN PROGRESS
2. ACTION: chairs to respond to issue raiser for closed issues
STANDING ITEM
Yves note that we don't care for internal changes
3. ACTION: SRT/ADD ENTERPRISE DOMAIN EXAMPLE FOR PRIMER.
IN PROGRESS
4. NEW ACTION: Mark 1166 as Resolved Later and mark it as editorial