Minutes W3C WS Choreography WG con call held on 1st April 2003, 1pm PST.

Agenda:

1.       Confirm scribe. 
      The following is a list of recent scribes (in order): Yaron Goland, Daniel Austin, Jim Hendler, Peter Furniss, Ed Peters, Greg Ritzinger, Leonard Greski
      Approve minutes
      March 2003, Face to face minutes: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/chor/3/03/F2fMinutes.html
      25 March 2003 Con call minutes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2003Mar/att-0012/2003/2503-1.htm
2.       Action Item Review
      Write up use cases 2003/03/25: Yaron 
      Write up a use case of what he see the choreography group addressing 
3.       Discussion on submitted Use Cases
4.       Glossary discussion
5.    AOB.

Role Call:

 

Chairs:

 

Martin Chapman

Oracle

Steve Ross-Talbot

Enigmatec

 

 

W3C Staff Contacts

 

Hugo Hass

 

Yves Laffon

 

 

 

Members:

Anthony Fletcher

Choreology Ltd

Mayilraj Krishnan

Cisco Systems Inc

David Burdett

Commerce One

Fred Cummins

EDS

Keith Evans

Hewlett-Packard

Yoko Seki

Hitachi, Ltd.

Assaf Arkin

Intalio Inc.

Sanjay Patil

IONA

Richard Bonneau

IONA

Eunju Kim

National Computerization Agency

Abbie Barbir

Nortel Networks

Steve Pruitt

Novell

Nickolas Kavantzas

Oracle Corporation

Michael Champion

Software AG

Monica Martin

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Carol McDonald

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

William Eidson

TIBCO Software

Jon Dart

TIBCO Software

Leonard Greski

W. W. Grainger, Inc.

Daniel Austin

W. W. Grainger, Inc.

Ed Peters

webMethods, Inc.

David Chapell

Progress Software

Jim Hendler

University of Maryland (Mind Lab)

 

MChapman: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2003Mar/0272.html

 

Appointment of scribe

CM: scribe is carol

 

Action items to review

SRT: small business approve 2 sets of minutes f2f and march 28

SRT: anyone have a summary of use cases?

1 jim hendler 2 from martin 2 from david beddette 1 paul 2 monica 1

MM: need to make sure that Monica's 2 use cases picked up

SRT: Also need to correllate submitted with the ones from the F2F

SRT: Frank McCabe submitted patient doctor waiting room

SRT: we will need to segment use cases to understand what kind they are

RB: And all these use cases are supposed to be accumulated into the overall

requirements document? YES

 

Use case discussion

SRT: Next item discuss use cases

SRT: MC categorizing use cases clarifies what we want

DA: Lets just decide as a group, for our purposes what we mean

scenario use case "user scenario = group of use cases "

MC: That is upside down from how I was thinking about it

use cases usually talk about business domain issues

scenarios are more lower level, 1 use case can have more than 1

scenarios

DA: I was talking about Object O use case definition

MC The point is we just need to define our terms and stick with it

Terms should be first thing which goes into use case document

SRT: My use case is not user oriented , not really message exchange

pattern, would prefer to call it a choreographic pattern

basis of exchange one can have to form a choreography

one is a pattern oriented use case and one is a user oriented use case

DA: In uml use case is defined as user interacting with a system

with web services there is not always a human being at the other end

are you trying to separate the use cases based on whether user is

involved or not

MCha: +1 to what Daniel just said!

???: Actor could be human or machine anything external to the system

MC: uml use cases always talk about business problem , there is another level

more mechanical level involving callbacks

JD: some of use are interested in having a business justification

may want to suppport a general pattern , but may help to have a business

example of use of pattern

concerned that we can define arbitrary patterns without a concrete use

MC: +1 to jdart

DC: +1 to what John just said

MC: if we can't find a real world example then why do the tech oriented

use case

JD: message exchange pattern is so abstract that you don't immediately

see use need to be able to map it on to real world scenarios

SRT: Summarize previous conversation

 

MCha: I agree but want to expand need to include business case but also

technical case for WS standard for automating

how would a machine processable standard fit into the equation?

MCha: use cases talked about choreo but did not make it explicit how ws-

chor language would assist in implementation of use cases

SRT: I agree. This is all about composition and/or contract enforcement.

SRT: To summarize whats being asked for is business context to justify use

case and we also need to deal with those use cases with respect to what a

standard for chor will mean contract enforcement composition

 

*** ACTION: ALL actions required re-submit use cases with business context

 

 

Editor appointment for requirments document

DA: Suggestions for editor appointment: who has been an editor before .

Need to establish 2 mailing lists ws-chor editors and comment mailing list

ws-editors-comments commment mailing list editors mailing list online

place for editors call something for Hugo and yves to sort out .

MC: For comments could use bugzilla

one list for editing issues and one for public comments on a particular

document would send things to bugzilla

have to go thru disposition process for w3c

is that email list connected to bugzilla?

HH: don't know

YL does not know either

 

*** ACTION: HH/YL Check connection of mailing (public-ws-chor-commnents) lists to bugzilla

 

DA: Daniel says: need editor's mailing list, public comments

DC: Asked a couple of questions with comments (public-ws-chor-commnents) going to

bugzilla , will this auto create a record ?

DA: Also need editor's call set up

MC: Reported that mailing lists are automatically archived

DC: Who receives it, just editors

DA: anyone can send email, archived , public for editors to discuss

without putting everything on the main list

everyone will not get mailed for every issue

DA: process issue: should adopt issues resolution process being used

by Arch group they have a w3c issuse resolution process, that way we have way of

dealing with issues also we should decide to use xml spec dtd for all docs

there is a schema if you are brave enough to use it, just make sure docs are conformant

to latest xml spec language definition save later hassles for editing

SRT: I'll take lead from the wise

DA: one thing we can do to help ourselves is to take advantage free

license for xml spy build in tool for editng w3c doc

ask hugo to request license for group for tool

 

*** ACTION: Hugo to ask for XML Spy licences

*** ACTION: Yves/Hugo setup an editors ML

 

SRT: we need to sort out editorship of the requirements martin we had daniel from Grainger abbie

from nortel volunteer to edit requirements doc

MC: Yes, both worked together on ws-arch doc. For requirements phase 2 people who worked together

before is ideal

DA: What is realistic time for a first draft

MC: f2f june time frame , have a good draft for discussion then we don't have a solid offer for hosting

nothing final for hosting from Grainger

DA: have 1 week or 2 to look at it and have a doc ready for f2f in june

???: does doc include all use case work?

???: what is methodology for requ?

DA: It is iterative , in inception phase 6 months a lot of churn drafts

then goes into passive phase making changes based on comments as

needed a lot of work up front on use cases after that it dies down , then just

maintenance based on that thinking must do a lot of work on use cases and general

classes of requ irements. 2 sources of requirements use cases and requirments of more general

cross functional nature.

like arch must obey these standards, language, have certain interoperabityy

there is a coherence to this process and if we can all understand process

then we can do good job with ws-chor

DC: We would like to offers xml schema editing tool from excelon sure they would

be happy to donate licenses (XML Sylus). It does a lot of things including

bpm , xslt transform debugging ...

DA Everyone would be glad to look at it

 

*** ACTION: DC to send details to private list

 

Use case discussion continued

MM: My use cases are on mailing list now

 

(JD)??: In another work group editor and chair iterated got it down to a few use

cases that capture others for exampel web site mgmt use case emcompassing others

JH: Brainstorming then categorization JIM

SRT: Can JH send examples

JD: I've played around with doctor use case could generate all kinds of scenarios

good candidate for one that could be used for scenarios

patient has to negotiate for time date , receptionist consults doctor

JH: Web Ont Use cases and requirements doc is at:

http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/

Last Call version due out tomorrow.

(note that WS chor will be asked to do a review of this doc...)

 

SRT: Do we have volunteers to walk thru use cases?

SRT: Doctor/Patient, Frank was originator of this but not on call

are any authors on line?

DB: will go through his use case originally sent to architecture group

international procurement exercise similar to many used in practice

company in detroit wants to outsource electr components for car

delivery of goods important buyer arranges for seller to pick them up

buyer seller have to cooperate for order pick up and delivery

make request to buyer to pick up agree when they picked up e

is an international choreography also must send out customs declaration

because it is internation must hold additional information, can have

different details in the message

MC: Davids use case at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2003Mar/0216.html ???: Martin can you recap what aspects of this choreo we should explore in this group

3 or more organizations participating as peers can adopt same choreo but detailed

content of message can vary 3 point choreo describes what goes right but must think

how to handle when things go wrong not delivered , message does not go thru

SRT: If you look at detroit buyer who is buying from korea and must send customs info

in your use case have you described the observable behaviour for 3 parties?

 

DB: You can not see inside for buyer or shipper we want to be able to re-use choreo in different

context , but interaction pattern is the same but detail is different

SRT: But interaction is not the same

DB: korean shipper sends 1 message with 2 documents

don't want them to be different if you think of all variations

 

*** POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEM

MC: This is a much bigger issue than the use cases, discuss it next week

 

 

DA: There is a well known solution in cases where you have different formats for docs abstract general doc

structure agnostic to actual format abstract general data structure then

MC: We should save this discussion for next week

SRT: That should be on the agenda next week to go into more detail on this

issue

 

*** POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEM

DA: Next week we should try to classify general groups of general requirements

 

SRT: Will come back to daniel separately for that to put on agenda

JD: The large issue we are punting the external internal issue , not

sure if good to punt on that

 

*** POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEM

MC: We need to discuss the issue of resuable choreographies and data formats

JD: does not object to deferring right now

 

SRT: It is on agenda for next week

JM: I would think the use cases will help to inform the internal/external (non ;-) issue

Glen: Definition of use case and usage scenario (see suggestion from HH)

JD: Schedule discussion of specific use case and make sure author is present

SRT: will take input from everyone for how to organize agenda for issues

 

Glossary

SRT: Glossary was submitted by monica from Sun

 

*** ACTION: MM to post gloassary document on publlic list for review

 

DA: A lot of things defined in ws overall doc, need to work with that

 

MC: propose changes or additions, not manage our own hugo how will we do the approval process ?

HH: There is an issue about glossary synchronization see how ws-description group is doing it.

ws architecture has own high level definitions they are commenting on definitions they don't like

there can be a ws-chor specific glossary and then integrated and resolve discrepancies

MC: Compile our own terms and then say Hugo can you put them into

bigger doc

HH: There are a bunch of defintioins but not maintained because delegated to this group, so owned by this group

 

*** ACTION: HH will take a look at monica's gloassary document

 

HH: comment on use case and scenarios and glossary ws-descr and ws arch argueing on which is detailed view

MC: Since we are talking about this again recommend we take the same conclusion and add this to ws glossary

 

*** ACTION: Hugo to dig up the meaning of use case and usage scenario

 

DA: have we banned the word orchestration ?

MC: yes for the moment

DA: we should point out why this is not there

MC: just put for orchestration see choreography

 

 

AOB

DA: Need to figure out f2f need to announce 8 wks before event

 

*** ACTION: CM will check with Sun about f2f

*** ACTION DC can check with sonic

 

DC: 2nd week of june is not possible for a few of us who are at JavaOne.

sun, sonic would be burlington close to boston

MC: In order to get 8 wk deadline need to know within a few weeks get back to

use soon

MC: Need to start on september for europe , kevin offered germany HD

(GR)?: I'm looking into Novell (MA) hosting too

MC: who is in S. France, yves?

CM: YES YES French riviera

 

 

SUMMARY OF ACTIONS

*** ACTION: ALL actions required re-submit use cases with business context

*** ACTION: HH/YL Check connection of mailing (public-ws-chor-commnents) lists to bugzilla

*** ACTION: Hugo to ask for XML Spy licences

*** ACTION: Yves/Hugo setup an editors ML

*** ACTION: DC to send details to private list

*** ACTION: MM to post gloassary document on publlic list for review

*** ACTION: HH will take a look at monica's glossary document

*** ACTION: CM will check with Sun about F2F

*** ACTION DC can check with sonic for F2F

 

Summary of recorded actions (from IRC)

ACTION: Yves/Hugo to investigate on how to connect public-ws-chor-comments with bugzilla [1]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T21-41-40

ACTION: Hugo to ask for XML Spy licences [2]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T21-46-07

ACTION: Yves/Hugo setup an editors ML [3]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T21-46-18

ACTION: discuss the issue of resuable choreographies and data formats [4]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T22-12-37

ACTION: Hugo to dig up the meaning of use case and usage scenario [5]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T22-22-30

ACTION: carol will check with Sun about f2f [6]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T22-23-40

ACTION: hugo xml spy license [7]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/04/01-ws-chor-irc#T22-27-55