Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
2011-03-09 Approach to USDL variant management
From W3C Unified Service Description Language
General
- Date: 2011-03-09, 3:30-4:30pm CET
- Topic: Approach to USDL variant management
- Dialin data: was provided by SAP
- Attendance: Markus Radmayer, Daniel Oberle, Norbert Weißenberg, Kay Kadner, Jan Weerts, Martin Schaeffler, Toni Ruokolainen, Torsten Leidig, Nils Meyer, Bryan Murray, Carlos Pedrinaci, Christian Hellinger, Gunter Stuhec, Petra Frenzel
- Shared document: File:2011-03-W3C-USDL-Variant-Mgmt.pdf
Minutes
Questionnaire: what is you opinion about the presented approach?
- Markus Radmayer
- Not so clear: do we use ecore anymore?
- Repository is independent from concrete representation
- Approach in general sounds nice, however, disadvantages are huge
- Norbert Weißenberg
- Idea good. Depends on the processes and license costs
- Could be implemented without SAP, just with context information attached
- BPMN 2.0 has extension mechanism in chapter 8.3
- Jan Weerts
- Technical problems, basic vocab rarely applicable to USDL/Ecore
- Processes could be problem due to single point of failure
- Has to think about it
- Martin Schaeffler
- Has to think about it
- Similar approach at Siemens, however, is uncomfortable
- Tooling, license costs
- Sees no other alternative
- Toni Ruokolainen
- Combined approach of ecore and CCTS, ecore for common, CCTS for disambiguation
- Nils Meyer
- Ecore tooling is important
- Likes context
- Afraid of too many context information and too many variants
- Very valuable approach
- Bryan Murray
- The context is interesting, however, can all the dimensions be gathered
- Important: processes, strong governance group
- Need more time to think about it
- Carlos Pedrinaci
- Echoes most of the remarks
- Would be strange to standardize a platform at W3C