Minutes WS Choreography WG conference call 8 November 2005

IRC: 	http://www.w3.org/2005/11/08-ws-chor-irc

1) Roll/scribe

Role Call: Martin, Steve, Monica, Gary, Abbie, Yves, Charlton 

Scribe: Charlton 

2) Agenda 


No changes, agenda agreeed

3) Minutes of last meeting 


Minutes approved 

4) Action item review 

1. ACTION: SRT to sort out hotels for the Dec F2F
In progress

2. ACTION: Yves to change the namespace to /2005/10/cdl

3. ACTION: Yves to add the above sentence in the entrance criteria in the status section

4. ACTION: Yves to move the end of CR to March 31st 2006

5. ACTION: SRT to put on the agenda "primer structure"

5)Candidate Recommendation 

When we are officially in CR, will we feel a perturbation in the force? :-) [ed not sure who made that remark]
We should deal with PR issues as they crop up once we're officially CR
6) Primer plan 

Primer audience 
High level view 
How to inform people about CDL 
W3C principal audience: Software developers 
SRT: Primary audience - CDL designers and people writing tools for CDL 

m2: The flow of the Primer at present is a different audience - primar dives 
into code level details 
... Need to describe what they are putting together with CDL, as well as how 

m2: Users want to see the "what", but document is mostly the "how" 

Gary: Introducing the context and architecture 
Martin: Purpose of the primer is to explain, in greater detail, the spec. 
... I think Monica is after more of a tutorial than a primer 
... We need to be careful as to our scope 
Abbie: Targetting the business analyst is outside the scope 
<SRT> +1 to Abbie 
Abbie: There will be promoters in this group for CDL; business analyst document 
should be done by these companies 
Charlton: perhaps padding the intro in the primer will help the BA. But 
that is as far as it should go. I am happy to provide text 
SRT: We seem to have broad consensus that the primer is targetted to a software 
role in an organisation that wishes to use CDL or provide tools for CDL 
... As soon as you deal with impl details, you are targetting a developer 

Abbie: Testing and validation is beyond the tools 
... Want services to work - need validation 
SRT: If over and beyond CDL design and tooling, it doesn't belong in the primer 
<Yves> validation of exchanges would be neat, but for some part of it we might 
have to wait for Kohei's work 
SRT: We have Kohei and Nokuko working on a note - i.e. if you use these 
algorithms, you will get these benefits - but such information does not belong 
in the primer 
Monice: If providing a developer with practicalities is what you are after with 
the primer, it is doing that already 
Monica: How fits things together is what we need to approach in the primer 

NEW ACTION: Exit criteria discussion for next week's conf call 

Martin: As much as we should not target business analysts, we should not target 
tools vendors. The primer should address normative understanding of the spec 
+1 Charlton 
Martin: It has to be neutral to the way you are viewing it - it is understanding 
the spec 
SRT: So that one may either implement or write choreographies 
... Why does one need to be neutral from those two views 
Abbie: Want a general purpose primer 

Gary: I think all that Martin is saying is that if we use the primer to explain 
the concepts of the spec, it will meet everyone's requirements 

SRT: If the primer is really just targetting explaining the aspects of the spec, 
how things work, and describing them, we simply structure the documents from the 
high-level to the detailed-level, with the objective to explain the spec by 
Gary: In that vein, we should leave out the section in the primer covering OOD 
SRT: Would I be correct to say is that we need to revisit the TOC for the 
primer, redo it in this neutral fashion 
NEW ACTION: SRT to reissue the TOC for the primer in light of out 
discussion at this conf call 

NEW ACTION: Move parallel composition and modularisation subsections into 
Section 3 of the primer 

SRT to redo the TOC, work with Yves on modifying the XML version of the 
document, rework some subsections 
SRT: No more on primer structure 

<SRT> Examples: 
Discussion: Examples 
SRT: Need a draft of this out before the end of the year 
... Need people to step up to the plate for examples 
... i) Silent actions - in the buyer/seller/shipper/credit checker, perhaps we 
have a silent action between two interactions, where we transform the order 
format to a shipping request 
... Order coming in, shipping request going out, and transform in between 
captures in a silent action 
... ii) Silent variables 
... iii) Timeouts - duration - add the necessary durations to elaborate the 
... iv) Exceptions - modelling busn exceptions, e.g. WSDL faults on the server 
... v) Finalizers - need to use compensation to illustrate this 
... vi) Globalized triggers 
... vii) Isolation levels on workunits 
... viii) Performs and binding 
... ix) Performs and choreography ids 
... x) Records in interactions 
... xi) Non-WSDL endpoints - JMS endpoints for example 
... xii) Binding to WSDL and SOAP, binding to WSDL 1.1. and 2.0 
... xiii) Channel Passing 
Gary: We need to add an example - adding identity information to channels, 
demonstrating correlation 
SRT: Also, concurrent performs 
... And, join condition example 
Examples suggested to be added to the list: 
1) Adding identity information to channels; correlation 
2) Concurrent performs 
3) Join conditions 
4) Alignment 
5) Completion 
6) Coordination 

Charlton: Is the list of 13 Steve submitted with the 6 we've mentioned here will 
be complete? 
Gary: Use as a starting point 
SRT: I would like people to commit to doing some example work 
... We need to publish these examples by the end of this year 

NEW ACTION: Memebers to think about examples and volunteer to do some 

<Gary> I will do the "timeout" and "correlation/identity" examples 
SRT: Example xiii) - Channel Passing 
<charlton> I will do the Non-WSDL binding and WSDL/SOAP binding examples 
SRT: Example xiii - instead of sending two distinct interactions, you send one 
... Should we have examples which illustrate degenerate use of CDL? 
m2: Other specs cover best practices for this purpose - is it in our scope given 
our earlier discussion? 

NEW ACTION: SRT to add a "degenerate use of CDL" section to the primer 

7) Next F2F 
Three main foci 
i. Primer 
ii. Examples 
iii. Implementation 
SRT: We may introduce an additional topic - Kohei/Nobuko to publish their paper 
on the public list (formal livelock/deadlock detection) - some time to set aside 
in the F2F for Kohei/Nobuko to present/discuss this work 
iv. Formalism 
SRT: These four topics will take up all the time 
... I will ensure that everyone has the necessary software - pi4tech - cut onto 
... Pantomime? Or Billy Elliott? 
Martin: Is Jerry Spinner still going? We may want to go see that 

SRT: I'll provide lists of hotels for the next F2F 
No other business 
Meeting adjourned 
SRT: At next meeting, let's choose a couple examples and work on them 

8)Summary of NEW Action Items

NEWACTION: Exit criteria discussion for next week's conf call 

NEW ACTION: Memebers to think about examples and volunteer to do some 

NEW ACTION: Move parallel composition and modularisation subsections into 
Section 3 of the primer 

NEW ACTION: SRT to add a "degenerate use of CDL" section to the primer 

NEW ACTION: SRT to reissue the TOC for the primer in light of out discussion 
at this conf call