;)
- DRAFT -
OASIS SCA-Assembly TC
16 SEP 2008
Present
| fred carter |
AmberPoint |
Group Member |
| Mark Combellack |
Avaya, Inc. |
Group Member |
| Dale Moberg |
Axway Software* |
Group Member |
| Jacques Durand |
Fujitsu Limited* |
Group Member |
| Tom Rutt |
Fujitsu Limited* |
Group Member |
| Eric Wells |
Hitachi, Ltd. |
Group Member |
| Bryan Aupperle |
IBM |
Group Member |
| Michael Beisiegel |
IBM |
Group Member |
| David Booz |
IBM |
Group Member |
| Mike Edwards |
IBM |
Group Member |
| Simon Holdsworth |
IBM |
Group Member |
| Dieter Koenig |
IBM |
Group Member |
| Simon Nash |
IBM |
Group Member |
| Jim Marino |
Individual |
Group Member |
| Martin Chapman |
Oracle Corporation |
Group Member |
| David DiFranco |
Oracle Corporation |
Group Member |
| Khanderao Kand |
Oracle Corporation |
Group Member |
| Anish Karmarkar |
Oracle Corporation |
Group Member |
| Rich Levinson |
Oracle Corporation |
Group Member |
| Ashok Malhotra |
Oracle Corporation |
Group Member |
| Jeff Mischkinsky |
Oracle Corporation |
Group Member |
| Plamen Pavlov |
SAP AG* |
Group Member |
| Peter Walker |
Sun Microsystems |
Group Member |
| Sabin Ielceanu |
TIBCO Software Inc. |
Group Member |
| Scott Vorthmann |
TIBCO Software Inc. |
Group Member |
Chairs
| Martin Chapman |
|
|
| Mike Edwards |
|
|
Scribe
Agenda:
1. Opening Introductions
Roll call
Scribe confirmation
Agenda bashing
2. Approval of minutes of SCA-Assembly TC meeting of 9th September
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/download.php/29335/SCA%20Assembly%20minutes%202008-09-09.html 3. Action Items:
id=2008-04-28-1 status=pending Editors to address the editorial comments contained in Combellack's comments at
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200804/msg00089.html id=2008-06-03-3 status=pending Simon Nash and Anish Karmarkar to develop a more concrete proposal for Issue 37 along
the lines of the F2F
id=2008-06-03-4 status=pending due=2008-12-24 Chapman to propose some non-normative clarification test to resolve Issue-26
id=2008-06-03-6 status=pending Test sub cttee produce test assertions and test artifacts and test harness
id=2008-07-22-3 status=pending Karmarkar to send an E-mail with details of use case
id=2008-08-05-2 status=pending Mike Edwards: Material for Issue Assembly-16 to be worked into a full formal resolution
id=2008-08-12-2 status=pending Simon Nash to prepare a list of locations in the Assembly spec where psuedo-schemas are
described as "snippets" or "schemas"
id=2008-08-26-2 status=pending Editors to re-consider the application of the resolution to assembly-57
id=2008-09-02-1 status=pending Edwards to follow up with editors on 2008-04-28-1 4. TC
Administrivia - F2F meeting in Boston, 30/09 & 01/10
5. New Issues Discuss overloaded operations restriction - raised in an email by Dave Booz:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00004.html 6. Existing Issues
ASSEMBLY-57 - status of application of the resolution of this issue
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200808/msg00040.html ASSEMBLY-8 SCDL artifact resolution underspecified
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-8 Latest proposals:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00000.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00001.html ASSEMBLY-37 Need to clarify contents of an SCA Domain virtual composite
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-37 Waiting for a write-up based on discussions at the F2F meeting
ASSEMBLY-77 How to map WSDL 1.1. portType to WSDL 2.0 interface and vice versa?
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-77 Alternate proposals are contained in the JIRA
ASSEMBLY-65 Constraining Type talks about non-optional references but does not define what they are
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-65 Proposal is contained in the JIRA
ASSEMBLY-63 Specification wording unclear on how local and remotable interfaces are specified
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-63 Updated proposal is contained in this email:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00021.html ASSEMBLY-62 What is the default value for many and mustSupply on Properties?
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-62 Proposal is contained in the JIRA
6. AOB
Minutes
Opening
Roll - 16/25 Meeting is quorate.
Agenda
<Mark Combellack>
updated proposal for issue 65
Approval of Minutes
Resolution: Minutes of 2008-09-09 approved w/o
Action Items
Action: id=2008-04-28-1 status=pending Editors to address the editorial comments contained in Combellack's comments at http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200804/msg00089.html
Action: id=2008-06-03-3 status=pending Simon Nash and Anish Karmarkar to develop a more concrete proposal for Issue 37 along the lines
of the F2F
Action: id=2008-06-03-4 status=pending due=2008-12-24 Chapman to propose some non-normative clarification test to resolve Issue-26
Action: id=2008-06-03-6 status=pending Test sub cttee produce test assertions and test artifacts and test harness
Action: id=2008-07-22-3 status=done Karmarkar to send an E-mail with details of use case
Action: id=2008-08-05-2 status=pending Mike Edwards: Material for Issue Assembly-16 to be worked into a full formal resolution
Action: id=2008-08-12-2 status=pending Simon Nash to prepare a list of locations in the Assembly spec where psuedo-schemas are described
as "snippets" or "schemas"
Action: id=2008-08-26-2 status=pending Editors to re-consider the application of the resolution to assembly-57
Action: id=2008-09-02-1 status=pending Edwards to follow up with editors on 2008-04-28-1
Nash:
Making progress but not yet complete.
Administrivia
F2F Boston 30-Sep-08 & 01-Oct-08
New Issues
Not exactly an "issue" but
Discuss overloaded operations restriction - raised in an email by Dave Booz
Booz:
No rationale for disallowing operator overloading
...reasonable due to other specs (WS-I, WSDA 2.0) but need to add text
MartinC:
Would be best to open as issue (for the record) even if purely editorial
Edwards:
Any objection to just an Action Item?
Action: owner=Editors Add text to justify no operator overloading as described in DaveB's E-mail
Existing Issues
Chairs to chase Editors for progress.
E-mail on list - No other comments but
Waiting for a write-up based on discussions at the F2F meeting
Nash:
Promises write up for next week.
Edwards:
Wait for Anish to dial-in later.
MarkC's proposal in E-mail above
Combellack:
Add text defining non-optional reference
Nash:
What about "MustSupply"?
Edwards:
Doesn't apply to references
Motion: m=MarkC s=DaveB Resolve ASSEMBLY-65 with material described in MarkC's E-mail
Resolution: Resolve ASSEMBLY-65 with material described in MarkC's E-mail
Combellack:
Spec only talks about Java or WSDL interfaces
...needs to expand to cover C/C++, BPEL, and other possible future interfaces
...Proposes additonal text in JIRA
Edwards:
Not sure "Component implementation technology" is correct
...s/b "interface technology" - e.g. if CORBA was used
<Dave Booz>
I would prefer "How a Service is identified as remotable is dependant on the Interface Definition Language used. "
General agreement about this - text would need to be tweaked
Vorthmann:
Has discussed current wording and seems too restrictive
Edwards:
Extensibility allows new i/fs and would be up to developer of i/f to define if it is remoteable
Misunderstanding on text - red herring
<Mark Combellack>
How a Service is identified as remotable is dependent on the Interface Definition Language used. As an example, to define
a Remotable Java Service Interface, the @Remotable annotation would be present on the Java interface class. In the case of
a WSDL interface, it would be defined by a WSDL port type
<Mark Combellack>
How a Service is identified as remotable is dependant on the Interface Definition Language used. As an example, to define
a Remotable Java Service Interface, the @Remotable annotation would be present on the Java interface class. If the interface
is defined in WSDL, the interface is Remotable.
Nash:
Last part seems to imply only some WSDL is remoteable but actually all are
<Simon Nash>
this is better.. please also take care of spelling issue.
<Mark Combellack>
How a Service is identified as remotable is dependent on the Interface Definition Language used. As an example, to define
a Remotable Java Service Interface, the @Remotable annotation would be present on the Java interface class. If the interface
is defined in WSDL, the interface is Remotable.
<Simon Nash>
would you like to produce similar words for Local as well?
<Mark Combellack>
updated wording for local case:
<Mark Combellack>
"How a Service is identified as local is dependent on the interface Definition Language used. As an example, to define a Local
Service, a Component implemented in Java would define a Java Interface that does not have the @Remotable annotation"
<Mike Edwards>
WD-04 of the Java CAA specification makes a statement about the mappability of Java remote interfaces to WSDL port types
<Simon Nash>
no, this isn't good
<Mark Combellack>
agree - redrafting
Discussion of WSDL and mapping of remoteable interfaces
<Simon Nash>
we are back to component implementation types
Vorthmann:
Cannot find any statement that says a remoteable interface must be able to be mapped to WSDL
<Mark Combellack>
Revised wording for local Services: How a Service is identified as Local is dependent on the Interface Definition Language
used. As an example, to define a Local Java Service Interface, the @Remotable annotation would not be present on the Java
interface class.
<Simon Nash>
ok with that
<Mark Combellack>
Just to consolidate the new wordings: How a Service is identified as remotable is dependent on the Interface Definition Language
used. As an example, to define a Remotable Java Service Interface, the @Remotable annotation would be present on the Java
interface class. If the interface is defined in WSDL, the interface is Remotable. How a Service is identified as Local is
dependent on the Interface Definition Language used. As an example, to define a Local Java Service Interface, the @Remotable
annotation would not be present on the Java interface class.
Action: owner=MikeE Check specs for definitions of remoteable interfaces
Motion: m=MarkC s=SimonN Resolve ASSEMBLY-63 with text above - replacing text descibed in JIRA
Resolution: Resolve ASSEMBLY-63 with text above - replacing text descibed in JIRA
Anish:
Bindings TC wanted a week to consider - next meeting on Thursday so should know result next week
Holdsworth:
Bindings TC will respond before next Assembly TC call
Combellack:
Describes proposal contained in JIRA
Last sentence in JIRA is wrong - s/b "If mustSupply is not specified, then the default value is false"
Nash:
Many=true on implementation could be overridden by Many=true on component - which is not good
Section 5.4 in latest versio of spec
<Dave Booz>
and 6.3 for the other reference to mustSupply
All sections should say MustSupply has default and the value is false
<Dave Booz>
section 4.1.3 is the earliest def'n of many
Nash:
These definitions are hierarchical - component, implementation, composite
...will implicitly inherit definitions from lower levels - only need default at lowest level
Edwards:
True but only some types of default can be overridden with specific values
Nash:
Yes. Many is OK but "MustSupply" is more difficult.
E.G. If component says MustSupply=True then implementation cannot say MustSupply=False
Edwards:
Take discussion to E-mail list to determine what is needed
Combellack:
On LOA for three weeks so cannot address until after that
Action: owner=MikeE Promote discussion on E-mail to determine requirements for ASSEMBLY-62
<Simon Nash>
i have raised my hand on a point of order... Mark's LOA is not recorded in the minutes
AOB
<Simon Nash>
the rules require LOAs to be recorded. Was that done in a previous meeting?
<Mike Edwards>
Mark asked for LOA by email - the chairs will deal with that
<Simon Nash>
they heed to ensure it is recorded in mnutes, according to OASIS rules
AnishK describes his E-mail with use cases for ASSEMBLY-8 (which completed his AI)
EricW:
MarkC's LOA noted above.
Discussion of these namespace use cases
<Mike Edwards>
we have Anish, Bryan Aupperle and Tom Rutt as stragglers
Schreiber diagnostics output
[Delete this section before publishing the minutes]
final validation: Date not specified, the date '2008-09-16' was assumed
final validation: Title not specified, default title 'OASIS SCA-Assembly TC...' was assumed
final validation: Chair not specified, default chair was assumed
statistics: Schreiber found 123 input lines
edits: Schreiber found the following text-edit commands:
edits: Line 38: s/Chiars/Chairs/
edits: Line 56: s/Resove/Resolve/
edits: Line 72: s/dependant/dependent/
edits: Line 101: s/Descibes/Describes/
command-scribe: Line 2: Eric Wells is recognized
command-scribe: Line 2: Eric Wells's nick EricW has been selected
edit-substitute: command on line 38 succeeded, changed line 37 from 'Chiars' to 'Chairs'
edit-delete: Line 38 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 56 succeeded, changed line 52 from 'Resove' to 'Resolve'
edit-delete: Line 56 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 72 succeeded, changed line 71 from 'dependant' to 'dependent'
edit-delete: Line 72 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 101 succeeded, changed line 100 from 'Descibes' to 'Describes'
edit-delete: Line 101 was deleted
citation-detection-scribed: Line 124: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'Anish's E-mail'
citation-detection-scribed: Line 127: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'Adjourned 9'
command-kaviroll: Line 129: Attempting to fetch roll from http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/event.php?event_id=16057&day=1221559200
system: Transformer: SAXON 9.0.0.6
[End of Schreiber diagnostic output]