Minutes
Opening:
Roll Quorate with 19 of 25 voting members present
Resolution: Minutes of 2009-01-13 accepted w/o
Action Items
Action: id=2008-12-16-2 status=done Editors to review issues with hyperlinks in PDF versions; perhaps the package used to generate
the PDF might need to be carefully selected
Action: id=2008-12-16-3 status=done Edwards to generate a proposal on Assembly-34
Action: id=2008-12-16-4 status=pending Vorthmann to produce precise text for the resolution of Assembly-37 consistent with the previous
directional decision
Action: id=2009-01-06-1 status=pending Edwards to require an update to ASM005026 to deal with binding on implementation type
Action: id=2009-01-06-2 status=done Edwards to raise an issue dealing with the conflict in muliplicity on line 1447 of revision 8
of the spec
Action: id=2009-01-06-3 status=done Nash to prepare resolution text for Assembly-95
Action: id=2009-01-06-4 status=pending Omnis to review open issues and decide to volunteer to create proposals
Action: id=2009-01-13-1 status=done Martin C to raise an issue for a proposal of the definition of an SCA runtime
TC Administrivia
Agenda will be published in the next couple of days
Conformance and Test
Edwards:
Reminds folks to review the test documents and artifacts
...and to participate in the test calls
Existing Issues
Edwards:
There are two alternate proposals, one to accept the proposal in the Jira, the other to do nothing
Motion: m:Rowley s:Marino Support conversational interfaces an optional conformance point in the specification
Rowley speaks in favor of the motion
He asserts that it is both implementable and desired by users and that the market will speak to influence vendors
Chapman:
Whether it is optional or not, the spec needs improvement since the semantics in the current spec are unclear; optionality
is an orthogonal issue
Rowley:
I believe the issues have been raised during the discussions on this issue. Those issues can be resolved.
Marino:
I think that the issues have been addressed in the email discussion.
Booz:
I think that we need something different than the model in the spec. I think we need a true shared context model.
Rowley:
I believe that the current programming model, particularly the ability to mark an interface as conversational, it is part
of, but perhaps not the only part needed for a shared context model. I am not sure where the current spec falls short.
...If you are thinking of a third party coordinator to support a shared context model, there are precedents but there are also
approaches that do not require it.
...Microsoft WCF supports a facility that supports conversational capabilities.
Nash:
The only implementations that support this conversational model is Java so far.
...Assembly does not go far enough to lay down prescriptive semantics in enough detail to assure interoperability
...the current spec provides a level of complexity and difficulty that makes it tough to deal with.
Rowley:
Active endpoints does support conversational services and is an existence proof that conversational services can be done successfully
beyond just Java
Nash:
My concerns were more around the point of interoperability. I think there is not enough in the spec to assure that interoperability.
Marino:
In terms of complexity, I think that we need to get down to specifics. End User feedback indicates that the model is simple
and easy to use.
...If there are specific points where it is unclear, I have addressed those in email, and would appreciate further discussion
if any of those remain unclear.
Karmarkar:
I think we are better off keeping conversational support out for now and leave it to a future version.
Motion: m:Karmarkar s:Booz Amendment by replacement "Move support for conversational interfaces to a future version of SCA-Assembly"
Karmarkar:
My intention was to resolve the issue with this motion
Rowley:
Urges members to defeat the amendment so that the motion on optionality may be decided.
Marino:
Could the issues be enumerated
Walker calls the question
There were no objections to calling the question
Vote underway on the motion to amend by replacement
results on the motion to amend by replacement; Aye-18 ;Nay-3 ;Abstain-2
Motion: (as amended) Move support for conversational interfaces to a future version of SCA-Assembly
Motion: to amend m:Nash s:Aupperle add the words "and resolve the issue"
nobody speaks against the amendment
Motion: (as amended) Move support for conversational interfaces to a future version of SCA-Assembly and resolve the issue.
<Michael Rowley>
Issue Title: Add Support for Conversational Services
<Michael Rowley>
Issue Body: Based on the support of conversational services present in SCA 1.0.
<anish>
needs to say 'future version' in the title/body
Motion: to amend add the following to the motion " Open an new issue of the title ' Add Support for Conversational Services' and a
body containing 'Based on the support of conversational services present in SCA 1.0'.
<Simon Nash>
(anish's comment) since we are doing this as a "super-motion", I think that does make sense
Motion: m:Rowley s:Booz (to amend) add the following to the motion " Open an new issue of the title ' Add Support for Conversational
Services' and a body containing 'Based on the support of conversational services present in SCA 1.0'.
<anish>
we can have this motion fail
<anish>
and then make another one with the right words
nobody votes in favor of the motion
Motion: m:Rowley s:Vorthmann (to amend) add the following to the motion " Open an new issue of the title ' Add Support for Conversational
Services in a future version' and a body containing 'Based on the support of conversational services present in SCA 1.0'.
Amendment passes without objection
Motion: (as amended) Move support for conversational interfaces to a future version of SCA-Assembly and resolve the issue. Open an
new issue of the title ' Add Support for Conversational Services in a future version' and a body containing 'Based on the
support of conversational services present in SCA 1.0'.
<Sanjay>
world is going to end in 2012
<anish>
i think 'future' allows the TC to decide exactly which version it should go in
<anish>
at a later point in time
Vote on the motion underway
result of the vote on the main motion as amended aye-19 ; nay-2 ; abstain-1
Resolution: Resolve Assembly-94 as follows: Move support for conversational interfaces to a future version of SCA-Assembly and resolve
the issue. Open an new issue of the title ' Add Support for Conversational Services in a future version' and a body containing
'Based on the support of conversational services present in SCA 1.0'.
Action: Edwards to spread the news of the resolution of Assembly-94 to the other TCs in the member section
<anish>
Proposal:
Change conformance assertion [ASM50012] to read as follows:
"If no binding elements are specified for the reference, then the bindings specified for the
equivalent reference in the componentType of the implementation MUST be used. If binding
elements are specified for the reference, then those bindings MUST be used and they
override any bindings specified for the equivalent reference in the componentType of the
implementation. [ASM50012]"
Add the following explanatory words following [ASM50012]:
"It is valid for there to be no binding elements on the component reference and none on the
reference in the componentType - the binding used for such a reference is determined bythe target service"
Motion: m:Freund s:Booz Resolve Assembly-98 with the proposal in the Jira
Motion: to amend by adding "and to add a cross-reference editorially"
Resolution: Resolve Assembly-98 with the proposal in the Jira and to add a cross-reference editorially w/o
Meeting adjourned due to press of time
<EricW>
We didn't take a straggler role - please add me as I spoke on the votes
Schreiber diagnostics output
[Delete this section before publishing the minutes]
final validation: Chair not specified, default chair was assumed
statistics: Schreiber found 87 input lines
edits: Schreiber found the following text-edit commands:
edits: Line 79: s/move/remove/
edits: Line 85: s/to decide/on
edits: Line 143: s/:/:
edits: Line 152: s/Jiraand/Jira and
command-scribe: Line 4: Bob Freund is recognized
command-scribe: Line 4: Bob Freund's nick Bob has been selected
edit-substitute: command on line 79 succeeded, changed line 29 from 'move' to 'remove'
edit-delete: Line 79 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 85 succeeded, changed line 84 from 'to decide' to 'on'
edit-delete: Line 85 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 143 succeeded, changed line 142 from ':' to ':'
edit-delete: Line 143 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 152 succeeded, changed line 151 from 'Jiraand' to 'Jira and'
edit-delete: Line 152 was deleted
command-oasisroll: Line 155: Attempting to fetch roll from http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/event.php?event_id=16075
system: Transformer: SAXON 9.0.0.6
[End of Schreiber diagnostic output]