[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Raw minutes of 2007-12-06 telcon
Danny van der Rijn: Good {time of day} to you all Mike Edwards: greetings Danny Room information was updated by: charltonb Dial-in: 1-888-967-2253 +1-650-607-2253 +61-2-8817-6100 +44-118-924-9000 Meeting ID: 877770 Meeting password: SCABPEL (7222735) Web-conf: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/sca-bpel-TC Acrobat connect room URL: http://my.adobe.acrobat.com/scabpel/ charltonb: good day! Danny van der Rijn: charlton - are you on the call? Mike Edwards: are you on the call Charlton ? charltonb: joining Please change your name from 'anonymous' using the Settings button charltonb: here charltonb: martin are you on the phone? Martin C: just joined charltonb: brill Mike Edwards: wow! a volunteer scribe ! anish: Agenda: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-bpel/event.php?event_id=16231 anish: Date: 6 Dec 2007 Danny van der Rijn: anish: agenda bashing? Danny van der Rijn: anish: Dieter - you have a new version on the editors list? Danny van der Rijn: Dieter: we do have a new version. minor editing plus inclusion of resolved issues. no objections from editing team. will upload to TC mailing list. Can we look at it together on the next call, approve it as a clean copy to start the year with? Danny van der Rijn: anish: All should review the document that will be uploaded. Sanjay should put it on the agenda for next week. Danny van der Rijn: anish: last week's minutes.. Danny van der Rijn: martin: move to accept last week's minutes Martin C did you mean me...i made no motion Danny van der Rijn: minutes approved with no objection Dieter Koenig: BPEL-12 ("Long-Running Request-Response Operations") has now been opened in the SCA-Assembly TC as ASSEMBLY-33 - see http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-33 Martin C: i think you ment Mike E Danny van der Rijn: martin - i realized that afterwards. I'm not familiar enough with others' voices. anish: Topic: AI review anish: Topic: next F2F Martin C is amazed that danny doesnt recognize my accent by now Danny van der Rijn: Mike E was speaking over Anish... Martin C i know i know, we all look alike as well Danny van der Rijn: anish: proposal to colocate a F2F with Bindings TC in Boston week of Mar 3 Danny van der Rijn: danny: stick to original symposium meeting in April Danny van der Rijn: martin: no objection (it *was* you this time, Martin) Danny van der Rijn: anish: how many days do we need? Danny van der Rijn: martin: 2. 1.5 minimum Martin C: we will prob be the only sca tc at the sympsium which is a good thing becuase of overlap Alex Yiu: BTW, Issue BPEL-12 has been updated with a Dieter's comment. Danny van der Rijn: anish: talk with Sanjay offline Martin C mmmmm meaty things Dieter Koenig: Issue BPEL-16 ("Ambigous Service Resolution") http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BPEL-16 (originally opened as ASSEMBLY-29) anish: Topic: New issue Danny van der Rijn: anish: 1 new issue, raised by Dieter, BPEL-16 anish: Scribe: Danny van der Rijn Danny van der Rijn: Danny: This is a cross-TC issue. Is dealing with it here the right place? anish i see the Q, letting some conversation go on for a bit anish: ScribeNick: Danny van der Rijn anish: Meeting: OASIS SCA BPEL TC Teleconference Alex Yiu: Dieter ... maybe you can find more details of Java's createSelfReference() and share with the rest of us then we can decide what to do in BPEL ? Danny van der Rijn: Mike E: not clear that this is an assembly problem to solve. Could be a problem for all the C&I TCs. Assembly allows a service to have multiple endpoints. Component won't know how many endpoints there are. Danny van der Rijn: Martin: let's look at the BPEL problem and solve it. Then if we want to make an assembly proposal, we can. Danny van der Rijn: Najeeb: How is this different when BPEL is used standalone? anish would entertain a motion here Mike Edwards: I want to move this issue to be opened anish: Present: Present: Mark Ford, Charlton Barreto, Michael Rowley, Mike Edwards, Dieter Koenig, Martin Chapman, Anish Karmarkar, Ashok Malhotra, Alex Yiu, Sanjay Patil, Najeeb Andrabi, Danny van der Rijn anish oops anish: Present: Mark Ford, Charlton Barreto, Michael Rowley, Mike Edwards, Dieter Koenig, Martin Chapman, Anish Karmarkar, Ashok Malhotra, Alex Yiu, Sanjay Patil, Najeeb Andrabi, Danny van der Rijn Danny van der Rijn: Alex: We should open the issue. If Dieter can find out more about Java createSelfReference(), that would be good. Partially agree with Najeeb, but BPEL assumes that one active binding used. Danny van der Rijn: Mike E: moves that the issue be opened. Charlton seconds Danny van der Rijn: issue opened unanimously Danny van der Rijn: Anish: Issue 11 discussion Danny van der Rijn: Mark: explains issue 11 anish: topic: issue 11 anish: Michael's proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200711/msg00019.html Danny van der Rijn: Mark: my issue with Michael's proposal is that it's different for literals and expressions. Either honor or ignore. Danny van der Rijn: Michael: Had similar concern, Michael explained to me, but it was too long ago and I don't remember Danny van der Rijn: anish: let's come back to this later Danny van der Rijn: topic: issue 3 Alex Yiu: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200711/msg00061.html Danny van der Rijn: Mike E: Do we agree that we can determine that there will never be a match when SCA conversations and BPEL correlation set doesn't match for the SCA-identified conversation? anish: s/Mike E:/MichaelR:/ Mike Edwards: anish: danny: simple Q -- do we have anything in BPEL C&I spec that says something about conversatoins and bpel process instance Michael Rowley: Support for conversational interfaces WS-BPEL can be used to implement an SCA Component with conversational services. See the SCA Assembly Specification [SCA-Assembly] for a description of conversational interfaces. When an interface that has been marked as conversational is used for a role of a partner link, no other mechanism (such as the WS-BPEL correlation mechanism) is needed to correlate messages on that partner link, although it is still allowed. This means the SCA conversational interface is used as an implicit correlation mechanism to associate all messages exchanged (in either direction) on that partner link to a single conversation. When the EPR of the partnerRole is initialized a new conversation MUST be used for an operation of the conversational service. Any process which, through static analysis, can be proved to use an operation on a conversational interface after an endsConversation operation has completed SHOULD be rejected. In cases where the static analysis cannot determine that such a situation could occur, then at runtime a sca:ConversationViolation fault would be generated when using a conversational partner link after the conversation has ended. See the SCA Assembly Specification [SCA-Assembly], section 1.5.3 for a description of this fault. It is important to point out that the WS-BPEL correlation mechanism is not restricted to a single partner link. It can be used to associate messages exchanged on different partner links to a particular WS-BPEL process instance. Danny van der Rijn: Michael: also wouldn't object to closing with no action Danny van der Rijn: Mike: What does this do to the case where they conflict? Danny van der Rijn: Michael: Proposal is to name a fault. If we don't standardize, each runtime could do their own thing. Danny van der Rijn: anish: are you moving to close with no change? Danny van der Rijn: Mike: would be just as happy to accept proposal Danny van der Rijn: s/Mike:/Michael:/ Danny van der Rijn: alex: agree with Michael. value of proposal is limited, given the small use case it's addressing Danny van der Rijn: Dieter: agree that we can't cover all cases. Some cases are more likely to happen. Event handlers going out of scope, etc. Danny van der Rijn: anish: calls for motion anish: danny: reason for standardizing the fault is so that it can be dealt with it programmatically anish: ... the number of programmer that would use this is going to be very small anish: ... not very useful Danny van der Rijn: Najeeb: Other processes can use the fault Danny van der Rijn: Michael: number of (BPEL) developers on client side who will choose to do something different with this fault is vanishingly small Danny van der Rijn: Najeeb: But they can identify cause of problem Danny van der Rijn: Michael: going to human reader, each runtime can do better or worse job describing Danny van der Rijn: Najeeb: can't catch them in standardized way. Danny van der Rijn: Michael: right, but how many people want to do so? If it's large, we should standarize. Danny van der Rijn: Najeeb: Would like to know what happened if using large numbers of correlations. Mike Edwards: +1 for a vote Danny van der Rijn: Alex: move to accept proposal here http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200711/msg00061.html Danny van der Rijn: Michael: second Sanjay: 5 mins left anish: /thx sanjay Sanjay: before the call ends anish to the chat nick Sanjay: You MAY be SHOULD unless you MUST MUST, MAY OR SHOULD? ? anish if we run out of time, the motion expires Danny van der Rijn: alex: partially agree with Danny's concern. Proposal is to standardize a fault vocabulary. But we could define cases for conformance test Danny van der Rijn: Michael: could define test. could test that fault is thrown or not Danny van der Rijn: Alex: since we agree that it's an optional feature, test could determine if implementation implemented optional feature Danny van der Rijn: anish: can we approve unanimously? Danny van der Rijn: Danny: objects Mark Ford: we may have lost some people MUST, MAY OR SHOULD? is lost in space Danny van der Rijn: mark no michael abstain mike yes dieter abstain martin anish abstain ashok alex yes sanjay yes najeeb yes danny no simon abstain Danny van der Rijn: Anish: motion carries 4 - 2. Issue 3 is resolved Danny van der Rijn: meeting adjourned anish danny, thx for scribing anish u get a free trip to the bottom of the scribe lit anish or even lit anish or even list anish can't type charltonb: sorry, called away on an urgent matter charltonb: btw Alex, +1 (yes) anish: Present+: Simon Moser
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]