MBUI XG telecon
12 Jan 2009

Introduction

Please note change of meeting code for today's call -- now 26632

Dave asks for agenda topics

Fabio, we need to plan in more detail what the XG is doing.

Dave says the XG is charted for 12 months.

recent additions to the Wiki

<jcantera> link?

Fabio: I added further material on task models explaining what they are and how they can be used.

http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/model-based-ui/wiki/Main_Page

<jcantera> thx

also links to people using task models and related work.

I have added to the section on use cases e.g. info from a European project we are involved.

http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/model-based-ui/wiki/Use_cases_and_requirements

Johan provide some use cases but isn't here today.

Gottfried: I have just joined as an Invited Expert and at some stage would like to explain work on a universal controller

Gottfried asks where to add his description?

Jose asks Fabio a question on the relationship between task models and SCXML

Fabio: SCXML is defined by the VoiceXML WG, right?

Yes.

Fabio: tasks models tend to be hierarchical and aimed at facilitating design.

Dave: Statecharts are at a more concrete level than task models for UI design.

Jose: SCXML can be used to describe behavior in terms of an event driven state machine.

Events can also trigger actions (outputs)

SCXML isn't specific to voice and is more general (based on UML statecharts)

<jcantera> http://mymobileweb.morfeo-project.org/archives/lang_allflow-engine-based-on-scxmllang_all/lng/es

SCXML may be considered as a compiled task model

<jcantera> http://forge.morfeo-project.org/wiki_en/index.php/SCXML_Getting_Started#Application_flow

Jose agrees to write up some material on SCXML and task models.

Jose: have we reached a conclusion about current approaches for task models?

<jaro> Hello, as posted, I will also create some materials on SCXML - eps. from the modelling perspective.

Jose: I understand that some people have proposed extensions to CTT, and I would like to understand what these are and why they were proposed.

<jcantera> we can work together on that, Jaro

<jaro> Thanks. We are recently developing a workflow system with flow definitions in SCXML.

Jose: an important goal for the MBUI XG is to summarise the state of the art.

planning

<jaro> We should consider the modelling power of SCXML and possible extensions, e.g. via interpretation of datamodels, custom actions etc.

<jaro> Such e.g. metadata (RDF) on states, access policies to transitions could be included in a singular, selfcontained SCXML doc.

Dave summarises the potential for using the wiki to support work on draft specifications and the associated use case, requirements and relationship to other work.

Dave quickly describes the W3C process for standards track work and how an Incubator Group can help to jump start standards work by a follow on WG

Fabio: in addition to CTT, we could perhaps work on abstract UI, what do others think?

Jose: yes we could do that and also work on the concrete UI.

Fabio: the concrete UI is a lower priority.

Jose: I agree on that.
... I think we can also cover transformations between layers.

Fabio: before we can deal with transformations we need to pin down the details of the layers

<jaro> Transformation - where comes the additional information needed on the more concrete level from ?

Simone: we need to ensure that concrete UI can be derived from the higher layers.
... how are errors and exceptions handled in task models and abstract UI? These are important

Fabio: the set of operators is sufficiently flexible for that

Simone: I would like to some examples of how that for CTT

Fabio: yes, we could do that.

Dave thinks we need a roadmap for the remaining 10 months or so.

Jose: indeed and that ought to include the timing of the face to face (before June)
... suggests meeting in May.

What would work for others?

early June would be okay, but otherwise we run into the Summer break

Jose and Fabio will have something on MBUI from the XFRA(?) EU project to contribute to this XG.

This involves a comparison of XForms and abstract UI and an analysis of what is missing.

<jcantera> NEXOF-RA

<jcantera> http://www.nexof-ra.eu

Dave summarises: it seems that we are in a rough concensus on focusing on task models, abstract UI, and transformations. We will check that the concrete UI is derivable, but won't put forward a specific standard for it

Of course this assessment may change if MBUI XG members have different ideas.

Dave the concrete UI is perhaps better understand as there are more examples around.

Dave asks about the next call.

General agreement on Jan 26 and every 2 weeks from then.

Jose: we need to complete the work around tasks models and relationship to other work.

and then the abstract UI before work on concrete UI and transformation techniques

<Gottfried> ANSI/CEA-2018 Task Model Description standard

Gottried will be able to present an overview in the call on Feb 9.

<scribe> ACTION: Gottfried to present overview on ANSI/CEA-2018 Task Model Description standard in the Feb 9 call [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/12-mbui-minutes.html#action01]