Minutes
Opening
Roll- Meeting Quorate with 22 of 35 voting members
Resolution: m:Henning s:Walker minutes of 2007-12-11 approved w/o
Edwards:
Next meeting will be 2007-01-08
... propose canceling the telecon of 2008-01-20 since it is the same day as the face to face
... will post the agenda so that it may ber discussed at the next telecon
Open issues
Assembly-11 Conformance Targets
Rowley:
I think that it is the document in the context of the domain n'est pas?
Nash:
We must be very clear to clarify such things with contextual information
Rowley:
Granularity of conformance might be an entire document.
Edwards:
The equivalence of our document might be a Java class file which may be validated
Rowley:
Various requirements might be more stringent than merely the equivalance of a valid Java class
... for example there are a bunch of things that schema will not tell you
Nash:
It may be too rigid to define in the spec as to whether certain MUSTS were deployment MUSTS rather than run time MUSTS.
Edwards:
Deployment is a phase, perhaps it might be good to not be too descriptive as to what thing is doing the deployment
A few: No, we don't think so, they are one and the same.
Rowley:
from Jacques comment, it may depend on what method you may use to obtain certification.
Jacques:
It may be hard to identify an entity that exists for only a brief moment.
Nash:
We may get ourselves too bound up concerning the transitions between responsible entities
Nickull:
Queues are inherently transient
<Sanjay>
Let us just call it SCA System (runtime + deployment tool + ...)
<EricW>
+1 to Simon N & jacques, etc. It may not be possible to clearly differentiate these "conceptual categories" for actual implementations.
Jacques:
The conformance target is one thing, the target of a precise normative statement is another thing
... a conformance target might be a much bigger entity defined in a conformance clause and related to certification
Rowley:
I would like to see more work on the artifacts of a conformance target...
<Michael Rowley>
[1]Could you clarify what it means for an individual artifact to "conform", especially with respect to any rules that might
need to refer to the context in which the artifact is being used (binding types, intents, implementation types, etc)?
Action: Chapman to re-work his proposal based on [1] above
Assembly-30
Edwards takes off his chair hat and speaks for the proposal
<Mike Edwards>
(from the proposal)
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- (c) Copyright SCA Collaboration 2006, 2007 -->
<schema xmlns="
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
targetNamespace="
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0"
xmlns:sca="
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0"
elementFormDefault="qualified">
<include schemaLocation="sca-core.xsd"/>
<element name="binding.sca" type="sca:SCABinding"
substitutionGroup="sca:binding"/>
<complexType name="SCABinding">
<complexContent>
<extension base="sca:Binding">
<anyAttribute namespace="##any" processContents="lax"/>
</extension>
</complexContent>
</complexType>
</schema>
<Mike Edwards>
<operation name="xs:NCName" requires="list of xs:QName"? policySets="list of xs:QName"?>*
Malhotra:
Can we ask Moberg to review this proposal since he has exposed several schema issues?
... can you run it through oXygen to see how it works?
Moberg:
I already checked it out. It works if the redundant elements have been removed
Resolution: m:Malhotra s: Moberg Proposal to close Assembly-11 accepted w/o
Edwards reads the post, there is no proposal offered
Jacques:
Points out the xmlp decision concerning the distinction between raising and reporting an error
Resolution: m:Rowley s:Malhotra New Issue Assembly-34 accepted w/o
Edwards describes the new issue since he is the raiser of the new issue
<Sanjay>
Chairs, the link in the agenda for the minutes of the last meeting (12/11) points to the minutes of a previous meeting (12/4).
I am not sure what we approved on the call today.
Rowley:
This might be best referred to the policy group to leverage the policy intent mechanism
Resolution: m:Nash s:Moberg new issue Assembly-35 accepted w/o
Meeting is running over-time
Edwards:
Editors, please give some thought to a progress report next call
<Mike Edwards>
Thanks folks
Schreiber diagnostics output
[Delete this section before publishing the minutes]
citation-detection-scribed: Line 92: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'A few'
statistics: Schreiber found 130 input lines
edits: Schreiber found the following text-edit commands:
edits: Line 83: bob: s/daomain/domain
edits: Line 89: bob: s/Simon:/Nash:
edits: Line 103: bob: s/Could/[1]Could
command-scribe: Line 4: Bob Freund recognized
command-scribe: Schreiber detected that this section was scribed online
citation-detection-irc1: Line 13: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 21: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'ASSEMBLY-11'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 22: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 24: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 26: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'ASSEMBLY-30'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 27: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 35: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'ASSEMBLY-34'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 36: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 38: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'ASSEMBLY-35'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 39: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
edit-substitute: command on line 83 succeeded, changed line 82 from 'daomain' to 'domain'
edit-delete: Line 83 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 89 succeeded, changed line 84 from 'Simon:' to 'Nash:'
edit-delete: Line 89 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 103 succeeded, changed line 102 from 'Could' to '[1]Could'
edit-delete: Line 103 was deleted
citation-detection-irc1: Line 116: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'xmlns'
system: Transformer: SAXON SA 8.9
[End of Schreiber diagnostic output]