Draft Minutes 25th May 04 con call

W3C WS-Choreography group

Teleconference Notes for 25 May 2004

Present:
Tony Fletcher (Choreology), Mayilraj Krishnan (Cisco), Steve Ross-Talbot (Co-Chair - Enigmatec), Abbie Barbir (Nortel), Greg Ritzinger (Novell), Martin Chapman (Co-Chair - Oracle), Nickolas Kavantzas (Oracle), Monica Martin (Sun), Yves Lafon (W3C staff)

Regrets: David Burdett (Commerce One), Charlton Barreto (webMethods)

Scribe:  Tony agreed to scribe.

------------------
Approve minutes
The minutes of the May 2004 face-to-face meeting were approved 

------------------
Action Item Review
ACTION 1: Participant: Participants aren't explicitly used anywhere - is it a candidate for removal?
Considered to be done as an action and raise as an issue against CDL - Greg to do this

ACTION 2: Chairs to put on agenda. "Roles within Roles".  Can one have a role within a role?  We will need to resolve this as it has considerable repercussions for CDL. 
Considered to be done as an action and raise as an issue against CDL - Greg to do this

ACTION 3: Chairs to put on agenda. Delegation Use Case (The Agent Acting On Behalf)
Considered to be done as an action and raise as an issue against Requirements document - Greg to do this

ACTION 4: Chairs to put this on agenda.  Exchanges & MEPs.  We will need to explore this relationship.
Considered to be done as an action and raise as an issue against CDL - Greg to do this

ACTION 5: For the editors:  All examples should have unique names except where related to other elements.
Close as action and log as an issue against CDL and assign it to editors.

ACTION 6: Chairs to put on agenda. Relationships (1:1 behaviour?): Relationship has role behaviour, which is currently structured as 1:1 (relationship:behaviour) - does this behaviour need to be relaxed in this context to manage 1:m (relationship:behaviour).  How do we define this?  Can we use roles within roles?  Can we use queue?
Considered to be done as an action and raise as an issue against CDL - Greg to do this

ACTION 7: Tony: to look at element choreography notation to see how we may be able to roll up transaction features into it.
In progress

ACTION 8 (priority): Take the TWIST example we're working on, add part of the flow what can go wrong, see what happens when things go wrong.  We can see in front of us the choreography being executed, what we do today with current language, what we can do with transaction.
Steve volunteered to have a go at this action as it fits in with the Banana calculus example he is also working on.  He plans to use the mailing list first to float some ideas and then perhaps some teleconference time.

ACTION 9: Nick: to prepare a list of tasks for editing, and at the next editing conference call, will ask those present to help with them.
Nick said the editing call has not been held since the recent face-to-face as David was not available, but Nick, David and Greg are working away. 

NON ACTION 10: (Worth tracking) David to re-present the Package Binding as some form of templating mechanism that replaces things rather than inserts new things.
{Original presentation http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004May/att-0020/WS-CDL_Package_Binding.ppt}

Actions from previous minutes 
ACTION 11: Greg to code up use case (from Requirements document) in CDL.
Greg sent in by e-mail as far as he had got before the face-to-face but will compare to the TWIST example and continue work as he feels he may have misunderstood some of the language features.

ACTION 12: Code banana calculus examples in CDL
Steve is now making progress on this topic.

ACTION 13: Steve and Nick made a list the resolutions and post in Bugzilla
Done.

ACTION 14: Daniel to come up with the requirements in determining the equivalence of WSDL files.
No progress.  Agreed to delete as an action and raise as an issue.  Tony admitted that he did not understand the significance of this issue and expressed the hope that the issue description would explain what the problem was.

ACTION 15: Steve to send the FIX protocol documents, links etc.
Done via Martin.

-----------------
Examples sub-group 
Steve announced that an example sub group has been set-up to be led by her Mayilraj.  Action Mayilraj to work with Steve and Yves to get time on the W3C bridge to hold an examples sub-group teleconference.  Mayilraj said that he planned to hold a call early next week.  Steve responded that unless there was a lot of issues to discuss it may be possible to use part of next week's call as the examples sub-group slot.
NEW ACTION:  Mayilraj to work with Steve and Yves to get time on the W3C bridge to hold an examples sub-group teleconference.

-----------------------
Issues categorisation

Martin said that the sub-group had finished a triages of issues last week (for all those submitted up to that point in time, that is).  All those not closed have been put into categories.  (Refer to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2004May/0035.html for most recent categorisation listing.)  Martin has added a category for language levels and also a bucket for one's not understood and where clarification is required (these will be assigned to those who raised the issue).  The rest of the group need to approve closure of those recommended for closure by the triages sub-group.  Martin suggested this was done on next week's call.  Still need to triages new issues as they are raised.
NEW ACTION:  Chairs to ensure that the main group approve closure of issues recommended for closure by the issues triage sub-group.

Issue Prioritisation

Need to find owners for each issue, and a sign assign owners for categories so that they can handle overlaps and relationships, etc.
Editorials are owned by the editors, and clarifications by those who raised the issue. 
Charlton has volunteered to own the ‘binding’ category.
NEW ACTION:  Steve to check with Charlton that he is prepared to own all of the ‘binding’ category as he was not on the call.

Martin and Steve appealed for people to step forward to own a category.

NEW ACTION:  Everyone to consider whether they can volunteer to own an issues category or two.

Steve is contributing to exceptions and faults though declined to own the whole category. 
Monica agreed to take on import, at least the specific one she is already working on and she said she would consider taking up the whole category. 
Greg volunteered to take on the remaining issues in the exceptions and faults category. 

---------
Examples

Steve is continuing to work.  Mayilraj is looking for other use cases to use as the basis for examples so that we can cover all the language features. 

--------
AOB

Martin gave his regrets for next week as he will be on vacation.
Steve has confirmed venue and dates for the next face-to-face and these are 4 - 6 August 2004 at the Royal Society (http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/confs/).

New Actions (25 May 2004)
NEW ACTION (20040525/1):  Mayilraj to work with Steve and Yves to get time on the W3C bridge to hold an examples sub-group teleconference.
NEW ACTION (20040525/2):  Chairs to ensure that the main group approve closure of issues recommended for closure by the issues triage sub-group.
NEW ACTION (20040525/3):  Steve to check with Charlton that he is prepared to own all of the ‘binding’ category as he was not on the call.
NEW ACTION (20040525/4):  Everyone to consider whether they can volunteer to own an issues category or two.

Received on Wednesday, 26 May 2004 13:16:58 UTC