Minutes WS Choreography WG conference call 31 January 2006

IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-ws-chor-irc

Attendees:Steve Ross-Talbot, Martin Chapman, Gary Brown, Charlton Barreto, Monica Martin, Yves Lafon

1. Role Call
	Barreto, Brown, Ross-Talbot, Chapman, Lafon, Martin


2. Confirm scribe

3. Agenda Changes

4. Minutes of last meeting

	NEW ACTION: SRT/Post minutes from last meeting.

5. Action item review
1. ACTION: Provide examples for issue 1503 of how to use lists/arrays - bounded and unbounded

2. ACTION: Add text to explain interaction lifecycle, and that exchanges are only guaranteed if align=true,

3. ACTION: Add pitfalls sub-section in Advanced Topics section, and include the distributed choice problem
Some progress on exceptions

4. ACTION: SRT to request CG to ask relevant group to provide example of using semantics in CDL
Asked for a resource in 2 weeks or there will be no work done.

	Reference: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2006Jan/0001.html

SRT: We have included a way to include RDF in WS-CDL. We may have planned to put an example in the primer.
If it's not there, it doesn't delay the work.
Chapman: Doesn't impact us moving to CR.

Group agreed that two-week deadline and proceeding forward regardless of input from this group.


5. ACTION: SRT Describe Connectedness/Strong Connectedness design patterns in CDL 

6. ACTION: Redraft Sections 1, Sections 2, and part of Section 3 for a more natural flow in the text
SRT: Martin asked to review Sections 1-3 when primer is released.

7. ACTION: Ask Marco/Kohei to provide copy of slides (SRT) 

8. ACTION: MC to add gary's issues from his slides into bugzilla 

9. NEW ACTION: SRT to send Imperial College slides to WG

6. Primer status
   Updated: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2006Jan/att-0019/primer.html

SRT: Updates made are in line with F2F requests. Section 3.2 varies in the example in what we discussed.
Provided a degenerate example, other than it helps us explain choreography. SRT described the simple diagram
that will be included.
Brown: First interaction should be a simple MEP rather than an exception.

NEW ACTION: SRT/Remove causeException in this interaction.

SRT: Describe subsequent sections briefly. Complete example is in Section 3.3.10.

7. Formal semantics status
SRT: Kohei Honda says that we plan to submit the drafts at the beginning of next week. This may be delayed.

8. Implementations status
	1. Pi4 Tech
	2. Imperial College
	3. TrustCom

SRT: Awaiting TrustCom. Imperial College is looking interesting (Howard Foster).

Action: SRT/Check with Foster on implementation and progressing to CR.

Brown: Revisit the reasons for restricting recursion on the perform activity, as I think this makes certain use cases complicated to specify in WS-CDL.
What happens if activities occur outside of the recursion.
Chapman: Will summarize in an email and put in Bugzilla.

NEW ACTIONS Brown: Send summary email.
NEW ACTION: Chapman: Enter into Bugzilla.

9. Talks and papers
Barreto: Could present at technical plenary (15 minutes).
Will there be a F2F prior to plenary?
Chapman: It is good idea to spend time on examples and exit criteria. Secondly, is end of Feb appropriate?
This meeting could be informal. We could delay to March 2006.
Barreto: An informal meeting would be fine.
Chapman: Dates will be 23-24 February 2006 in Dublin in informal meeting.
SRT: Can't attend then.
Chapman: The alternative is after the plenary.
Look at future dates and advise.

NEW ACTION: SRT and Chapman/Establish F2F date for spring 2006.

10. AOB

11. Next Call
7th Februrary 2006