9 of 13 voting members attending
Agenda never made it to the mailing list, but is available on the website
Any changes to the agenda?
None, agenda apprived
approval of minutes
Any changes to the minutes? None? Minutes approved
Danny made it to the call
#0021 chairs to follow up with Mary to post the CD docs to OASIS repository
No new updates to this AI
#0028 Dieter to include the statement that the pdf version is authoritative
Uploaded docs on Monday, XML Schema files per naming convention from Sanjay, two versions of the draft
#0029 Sanjay to provide the link to the naming guideline document on the ML
#0030 MichaelR to prepare a BPEL-14 proposal for annotating serviceName,
referenceName and intents in the source BPEL process definition
Haven't seen an email on this
Notice src doc to work with is almost ready, basing this on #01, will write next working draft as resolution to this issue
Haven't seen any for this week.
15 minute window OASIS had to shut down email system, may have had something to do with this
Status of Committee Draft publication to OASIS doc repository
Sanjay and MikeEdwards had suggestions as to filename formats
Sanjay suggested that this version of the URI contained the doc level and sequence number. Mike Edwards had slightly different
I didn't understand the need for the sequence number
THe URL itself does not have unique token that would distinguish one version from another. If we don't have a different filename
for each new version, every new version overwrites what was there previously
OASIS policy is that an artefact that existed once s/always be accessible
Should have a permanent URI value, something that separates each URI from URI value. Some TCs incl date of uplaod of doc
to repository. Instead of dot level, we could use date. While that would work fine, we usually use dot level and version.
Question - this seems to assume we would change this version URI of we go from CD02 to CD03, even if no change to the schema.
I hope that is not true.
I think we should do that - reflect the CD name in the version. Primarily we need to address where there are changes to the
schema from one version to the other. I don't see versioning when none of the textual content has changed to be a bad thing
If only the XSDs we're talking about, i think it is irrelevant to tie the naming of the XSD to the CD level
Different sequence number on the file name doesn't tell you that a change was made, necessarily
Date is more meaningful than some CD number. I would suggest using the date of change as part of the filename
I am ok with that
Then the latest date reflects the last published, rather than some random CD numbering scheme
I don't see the name of the file as being relevant here. I agree with MikeEdwards that if we don't make changes we shouldn't
increment it. I would just follow the same filename as the CD itself
What are you suggesting? Not happy with changing the filename if the content hasn't changed. correct?
Yes. I think where we have the CD where we haven't made a schema change as a minority case at most, non-existent at least.
For changing the schema, I suggest we follow the naming scheme for the rest of the artefacts. An unique name is good enough.
Why not follow existing practice per OASIS file naming guidelines
Can we use the above for ThisVersion URI?
Danny van der Rijn: Issue for Liason/Steering Committee?
There's a diff between how we would generate filenames for schema vs. the spec. The schema would have a date in it. I have
this notion of namespace versioning, that we would not change the namespace URI if there are no changes that break compatibility.
The date in the file has the same date as the namespace URI. If the namespace URI did not change, since the date in the file
didn't change, but the schema changed, I think we'd need the sequence number as a unique id, but not at the doc level.
Do we have a proposal on the table for this, and is this a Liaison/SC issue?
I have a slightly different proposal [describes]. Do we need the date of publication? Or can we use a serial/sequence number
I think that works as well - the last token simply needs to be some unique identifier
Compare with this, which has just one date:
Why do we need date and sequence number? If we use date as with WS-A, we have an unique id. Anyway this is not the final
schema/artefact. In interim schema, do we need sequence number?
there is already a date in the URL itself
In the tx example, '2006/06' perhaps is coming from the namespace URI, and
'200701' is the date of compatible change
This is for the filename of the XSD. For the same namespace, there c/b multiple versions for that namespace schema. It is
possible we have 10 versions of the 200701. Namespace URI would NOT contain the sequence number, but the date. This reflects
the file name.
Do we expect multiple schema for that date?
Looking at the filename, you would not know the date in the namespace
The thinking is that the 2006/06 part in the uRL is fixed until there is an incompatible change
There are two different things w.r.t. date and month - one is of the namespace URI, the other of incompatible change
Need to reconcile our use of date and month with date of incompatible change. I believe Anish's suggestion would work. I
move to adopt that suggestion as in the chat.
I second that proposal
Motion: Sanjay Second: MikeEdwards
May be great idea to id schema uniquely, but it is not user friendly
Suggest not using ids in file name
Just to be clear, the motion is about 'This Version URI'
Should convey what they mean - semantic meaning - date has this. Sequence number has no semantic meaning.
Do you have an alternate suggestion?
Date is sufficient
For me it doesn't matter, but just to make it concrete, example with Najeeb's suggestion would look like
We have two proposals on the table
anish i don't have a preference between the two
THis is a Liaison/SC issue, consistency is preferred
+1 to anish. We can revisit this issue if Liaison thinks otherwise
We can take this to the Liaison/SC
everything about the filename looks weird to me. we just need to agree upon some 'ugly' format.
THis is pretty ugly
I am in the same boat
MikeEdwards provided an example, but both dates, but not in same way as in Najeeb's proposal. Why not consider MikeEdwards'
I am speaking against the proposal. It seems confusing and doesn't clarify anything beyond what has already been proposed
separating the two dates by a few characters might be slightly friendlier but still weird
Having two dates together doesn't convey semantic meaning clearly
Are there any objections to Najeeb's amendment?
Any objection to approval of this amendment? Khanderao objects
Put to a vote (accept amendment):
Ashok please speak up or unmute if you are on the telcon
Does a chat room vote count? If not on the phone
Does that count MartinC?
If it doesn't affect the outcome, no point discussing it
Amendment thus does not carry: 5 No votes to 2 Yes votes
Sanjay proposed new amendment
Can the OASIS i/f handle that?
Yes (AT namespace)
This creates a dir in the OASIS repository
I don't see a tech issue with this
Sanjay moves for that amendment: Amendment: Adopt the following format for 'This Version URI': http://docs.oasis-open.org/opencsa/sca-bpel/
[YYYY of namespace URI]/[MM of namespace URI]/wstx-wsat-1.1-schema-[YYYYMM-of-publication].xsd
We've spent a lot of time on this issue and have less than 10 minutes on the call, can we move this issue along?
No additional discussion? Any objections to approving the amendment? Not hearing any, the amendment is approved
Now we have an amended main motion. Any more discussion?
Any objection to approving this amended main motion? None. It is approved. Sanjay can you take this to the Liaison/SC?
This example would have sca-bpel relevant characters in place of wstx-wsat: http://docs.oasis-open.org/opencsa/sca-bpel/
[YYYY of namespace URI]/[MM of namespace URI]/wstx-wsat-1.1-schema-[YYYYMM-of-publication].xsd
Discussion on how OASIS mailing list is still not working
With 4 more minutes, rather would go through rest of pub issues. Sanjay to talk about latest URI
Sanjay moves to adopt this convention
Discussion? Any objections? None. Motion is approved
Danny van der Rijn: FYI I just got Michael's email so the list seems to be working
Three more things to run through: Dieter posted the schema files - any comments?
They reflect what is in the CD
Ivana also posted the RDDL doc - any comments?
Requires reference to SCA namespace
Where it says [TBD]
Ivana can you make the change before the next call?
I can take the editors AI for makeing the above approved changes
Will the package be ready to send to Mary after the next call?
I've already placed the three versions in the zip archive and posted it
Ivana to post latest version with changes (RDDL doc)
Any other business? None. Any stragglers? Have Danny, Ivana and Najeeb. Meeting adjourned.
Schreiber diagnostics output
[Delete this section before publishing the minutes]
citation-detection-scribed: Line 160: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'Proposal'
citation-detection-scribed: Line 161: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'Motion'
citation-detection-scribed: Line 201: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'Simon'
statistics: Schreiber found 255 input lines
edits: Schreiber found the following text-edit commands:
edits: Line 94: charltonb: s/version/versions/
edits: Line 111: charltonb: s/MichaelR/MikeEdwards/
edits: Line 151: Sanjay: s/incompatible/compatible
edits: Line 238: Sanjay: s/This Version/Latest Version
command-scribe: Line 2: Charlton Barreto recognized
command-scribe: Schreiber detected that this section was scribed online
citation-detection-irc1: Line 16: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 24: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 27: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 45: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 48: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 49: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 55: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 58: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 59: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 63: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'a) Issue 14 http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 64: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'TITLE'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 65: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'SUBMITTED BY'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 66: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'Latest email'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 69: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'b) Issue 15 http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 70: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'TITLE'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 71: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'SUBMITTED BY'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 73: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'c) Issue 18 http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 74: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'TITLE'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 75: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'SUBMITTED BY'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 77: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'd) Issue 16 http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 78: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'TITLE'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 79: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'SUBMITTED BY'
edit-substitute: command on line 94 succeeded, changed line 93 from 'version' to 'versions'
edit-delete: Line 94 was deleted
citation-detection-irc1: Line 106: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 108: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 109: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
edit-substitute: command on line 111 succeeded, changed line 110 from 'MichaelR' to 'MikeEdwards'
edit-delete: Line 111 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 151 succeeded, changed line 148 from 'incompatible' to 'compatible'
edit-delete: Line 151 was deleted
citation-detection-irc1: Line 229: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 230: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
edit-substitute: command on line 238 succeeded, changed line 235 from 'This Version' to 'Latest Version'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 237: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
edit-delete: Line 238 was deleted
citation-detection-irc1: Line 243: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'a) Issue 14 http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 248: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
system: Transformer: SAXON 188.8.131.52
[End of Schreiber diagnostic output]