OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Meeting minutes

Attached are the meeting minutes from 8-18-05.  Thanks Joe!

 <<Registry TC - Minutes of 08-18-05 Conference Call.txt>> 

Kathryn Breininger
CENTRAL Project Manager
Emerging Technologies
Boeing Library Services

425-965-0182 phone
425-237-3491 fax

> How was your service? Please click link below.......
> http://socal.web.boeing.com/ssglibsurvey/


1. Approval of previous meeting minutes
2. Minute taker
3. The main item of discussion will be the webinar, which is scheduled for Sept 14th at 6:00 pm Pacific Time, and September 15th at 11:00 am ET (8:00 am PT).  Please review the draft materials prior to the meeting.
I will need to leave the meeting at about 8:50, so please join promptly so we have time for lots of discussion and review of the webinar presentation. 
4. Other issues, items
5. Next meeting.


Ivan Bedini		France Telecom
Monica Martin		Sun Microsystems
Carl Mattocks		Individual
Farrukh Najmi		Sun Microsystems
Kathryn Breininger	The Boeing Company
Joseph Chiusano		Booz Allen Hamilton
Nikola Stojanovic	GS1


AGENDA ITEM #1: Approval of previous meeting minutes

- Previous meeting minutes temporarily missing - not approved

- ACTION ITEM[Kathryn]: Find previous meeting minutes and send to TC

AGENDA ITEM #2: Minute taker

- Joe Chiusano to take minutes

AGENDA ITEM #3: The main item of discussion will be the webinar, which is scheduled for Sept 14th at 6:00 pm Pacific Time, and September 15th at 11:00 am ET (8:00 am PT).  Please review the draft materials prior to the meeting.

- Carl walked the TC through the latest version of the slides; he began by reading the agenda

- We will focus on first 20 slides for the webinar, and add some use cases

- Carl will narrate the first 20 slides, then Farrukh will do a live demonstration

- This will be followed by a Q&A session and summary

- Carl read the definition and purposes of ebXML Registry (slide 3)

  * TC agreed with stated content

- Slide 4: Carl will need to emphasize difference between metadata and data

  * Carl: "Metadata instance describes a content instance, or a metadata instance"

  * Monica: Better to say "content or another metadata instance" - good

	- Joe: Suggested a way to simplify the ideas - all content is data, but may be used as metadata (e.g. XML schema)

	- Nikola recommended staying away from the distinction between metadata and data for content, for simplicity purpoess
  	  * However, we should make a distinction between metadata in the registry, and content (data) in therepository

	- Joe: We can describe the "registry vs. repository" concept
 	  * Then, if appropriate, describe how some data in the repository may be used as metadata 

  * ACTION ITEM[Carl]: Tweak slide 4 for the above and send to TC for comment

- Slide 5: Carl will need to emphasize difference between metadata and data

  * Monica, on non-dependency on other ebXML specs: Recommends saying "can be used with other ebXML artifacts", or "is independent of X", or "neutral", as current wording can be perceived as negative

	- Others agreed

	- Monica recommends "ebXML Registry is more than..." - we can say it stores all sorts of artifacts, including ebXML artifacts
	  * So it doesn't sound like we are trying to disassociate ourselves from ebXML

	- ebXML Registry can support design and run-time use

  	  * It can be used with many other specs, including [list them on slide]

	  * It serves many purposes, complements, etc.

  * ACTION ITEM[Carl]: Update slide 5 for the above 

- Slide 6 comments:

  * Some felt that use of term "API" is too narrow

  * Use of term "protocols" - what aspect? Description of SOAP/HTTP, or "how to"'s (such as host redirect, etc).

  * Joe: Change this to refer to "interfaces and technical protocols" - better for business-level understanding

  * Monica: Separate the ISO 15000 standards (RIM and RS)

  * ACTION ITEM[Carl]: Update slide 6 for the above 

- Slide 7 comments:

  * Carl: Will add CCTS as a use case (Ivan clarified)

  * Joe: Remove multiple references to "X registry", "Y registry",etc. - may give incorrect impression that the registry wears too many hats, and must reconfigure for each use

  * Kathryn: Also emphasize that these are just examples - there are more

  * ACTION ITEM[Carl]: Update slide 7 for the above 

- Slide 8:

  * Carl asked Ivan if we should add CCTS profile? Ivan: yes

	- Ivan is working on this profile - he has released a draft that is waiting for comment

  * Monica: Say "current examples of profiles include", instead of repeating "profiles" for each instance of a profile

  * Joe: Reverse profile definition points - describe what the profile is first

  * Monica: Should not say "interoperability within a domain" - may cross domains

  * Joe: Should simplify definition to not reference extensibility and restriction

	- Suggestion: "A profile defines a particular use of ebXML Registry", etc. (better for business-level understanding)

	- Farrukh joined the call at this point

	- Suggested Updated wording: "Defines requirements for implementing ebXML Registry within a particular business context"

	- Farrukh added that it defines rules

	- Farrukh also likes the reference to restrictions and extensions - so that everyone restricts and extends the spec in the same way - each vertical can have their own extensions/restrictions

	- Joe: Likes the phrase "in the same way" (or "in a standard way") - a key point

	- Carl: Likes "rules" instead of "restrictions/extensions"

	- Farrukh: That will work, even though rules may mean policies - which are only part of defining the restrictions/extensions

	  * A profile will contain policies

	- Monica suggested using "scope" or "constraints", and to put these words in ()s
	- Farrukh: First preference is "restriction/extension", second preference is "rules"

	- Carl: Recommends leaving "restriction/extension" to appendix, and incorporating the word "constraint"

	- Farrukh is not comfortable with the term "constraint" - it's not drastically different than "restriction/extension"

	  * Farrukh recommends only "rules" as an alternate choice
	- Ivan does not like "rules"
	- Carl likes "requirements"

	- Farrukh: You can say "requirements and rules"

	- ACTION ITEM[Carl]: Initiate e-mail with different choices and get feedback from TC

	- Kathryn left the call at this point

  * Kathryn: Ivan and Farrukh will set up call numbers

	- Ivan pointed out that it will be 3am where he lives; he recommends changing the time

	- ACTION ITEM[Kathryn]: Talk to Carol Geyer about changing time

  * Carl read examples

	- Farrukh: HL7 has a particular group working on this - recommends striking it or getting someone to clarify
- Slide 9 - WSS:

  * Farrukh: Need to include governance on this slide

	- Enforcement of organizational policies *is* governance

	- Registry enables governance of service artifacts

  * Carl and Farrukh agreed to only have 2nd picture

 	- ACTION ITEM[Farrukh]: Consider updating slide to emphasize governance more, and revisit WS definition

 	- May also drop slide 10

- Slide 12 - Government information management use:

  * Slide 13 shows figure with Gov of Canada pilot (Pan-Canadian Registry Pilot)

  * ACTION ITEM[Farrukh]: Get Canada's review and approval to use their information in slides

  * E-Gov applications - need to talk only about one or 2 of them (Farrukh will cover this slide)

- Slide 16 (Key Benefits) - to slide 20:
  * Carl: Is this where we want to end?

  * Joe recommended moving features to an earlier slide

  	- Farrukh: No, we need use cases, etc.

  * Farrukh: Slide 18 will be a backdrop for demo

  	- Will show some examples of these items

  * Carl will talk about benefits, then will end at features table (slide 18-19)

  * Then demo

  * Then review features table - emphasize certain ones

  * ACTION ITEM[Carl]: Update slides 1-18; 19-on are ok as is

  * Farrukh: Also need say what immediate next steps are

  * Key areas we want to focus on next - see "Future Direction" at end (slide 63-ish)

  * Interoperability testing - does not require a particular spec (Farrukh)

  * Next level: Have conformance specs for interoperability - interoperability is then greatly improved

  * Additional profiles

	- Farrukh: SCM is the big ticket item for this

	- Carl: Tell audience that we are focusing on more profiles, and they should give us ex's of profiles they need

  * Farrukh: Slide 64 is key slide (wrapup)

  * Carl: Post-demo will include slides 19, 20, 63, and 64	

  * Farrukh: If short on time, can refer them to slide for What's New in 3.0, then focus on future directions and summary

	- Farrukh will do all 4 of these slides

AGENDA ITEM #4: Other issues, items

- None; adjourned.

AGENDA ITEM #5. Next meeting:

- 2 weeks.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]