Minutes
Agenda bashing
Anish:
Testing assertions needs to be completed by tomorrow
Approval of 2009-02-19 meeting minutes
Feb 19th meeting minutes approved.
Resolution: Minutes of the 2009-02-19 telcon located at http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200902/msg00024.html are approved
Action item review
Anish sent first draft of test assertions.
Issue 28
Anish:
Assembly has removed support for conversational interfaces.
Michael Rowley:
Moves to resolve the issue 28 by deleting section 2.4 and non-normative appendix section
Resolution: Issue 28 is resolved by removing section 2.4 and Appendix titled 'Non-normative text"
issue 27
<Martin C>
2.The implementation MUST support every SCA BPEL extension defined in this specification, and must implement them as defined.
<Martin C>
2.The implementation MUST support the SCA BPEL extensions defined in Section 3, and MUST implement them as defined.
<Martin C>
this is a rewording of point 2 of 5.2
<anish>
discussion of issue 27 suspended till Martin can come back with an updated proposal
Test assertion document discussion
Anish:
Test assertions same as assembly but added extra column for comments.
<Mike Edwards>
I think that it is meaningless
<anish>
New Issue, title: BPEL1001 is an incorrect normative statement
<Mike Edwards>
"For an SCA component to use a WS-BPEL process as an implementation, it uses an <implementation.bpel/> element:"
Michael Rowley moves that BPEL1001 is an incorrect normative statement
Resolution: new issue (29) about incorrectness of the normative statement in BPEL1001 opened
<Martin C>
is ready with revised conformance text
Dave Booz moves to resolve issue 29 by replacing text in lines 6,7 and 8 in cd01-rev15
Resolution: issue 29 is resolved by replacing lines 6-8 in cd01-rev15 by "For an SCA component to use a WS-BPEL process as an implementation,
it uses an <implementation.bpel/> element"
Issue 27 (continue)
<Martin C>
5 Conformance
There are two categories of artifacts that this specification defines conformance for: SCA Documents and SCA Runtimes.
5.1 SCA WS-BPEL Document.
A SCA WS-BPEL Document is a document that complies with the requirements defined by WS-BPEL[2.0] and MAY include the SCA WS-BPEL
extenstions defined in Section 3. Any document using these extensions must comply with the sca-bpel schema and any other constraints
defined by this specification.
5.2 SCA Runtimes
There are two conformance options defined by this specification:
1. Implementations of an SCA WS-BPEL Runtime
2. Implementations of an SCA Extended WS-BPEL Runtime.
5.2.1 SCA WS-BPEL Runtime
An implementation that claims to conform to an SCA WS-BPEL Runtime MUST meet the following conditions:
1. The implementation MUST meet all the conformance requirements defined by the SCA Assembly Model Specification [Assembly]
i.e. it MUST be a conforming SCA Runtime.
2. The implementation MUST be a compliant WS-BPEL Processor as defined in [WS-BPEL 2.0]. It must accept and process
WS-BPEL 2.0 process descriptions in a manner defined by WS-BPEL 2.0.
3. The SCA BPEL extensions defined in this specification MUST be treated as WS-BPEL 2.0 extensions. WS-BPEL process
descriptions containing the SCA BPEL extensions MAY be rejected.
4. With the exception of the SCA BPEL extensions, the implementation MUST comply with all the normative statements in
this specification (appendix ?), notably all the MUST statements have to be implemented.
5.2. 2 SCA Extended WS-BPEL Runtime
An implementation that claims to conform to an SCA Extended WS-BPEL Runtime MUST meet the following conditions:
1. The implementation MUST meet the conditions for an SCA WS-BPEL Runtime above with the exception that SCA BPEL extensions
defined in this specification MUST be supported. WS-BPEL process descriptions containing the SCA BPEL extensions MUST NOT
be rejected
2. The implementation MUST support the SCA BPEL extensions defined in Section 3, and MUST implement them as defined.
Anish:
lower case must in section 5.1
<Martin C>
all musts MUSTbe MUST
Mike Edwards:
SCA WS-BPEL document section not required.
Anish:
We don't need to make a distinction between runtime and tools.
Dave Booz:
we should not be in business of creating test assertions for documents
anish time chk: 12 minutes
Ashok:
SCA policy prespective documents are valdiated all the time.
Martin C notes that i have made a similar proposal in Assembly
<Mike Edwards>
But that is NOT the same as testing the documents themselves
<Martin C>
who said anything about testing documents
<Martin C>
this change does not affect the normative statements in rest of the doc
<Sanjay>
I am in another meeting so can't speak. My thinking here is that - conformance statements and test assertions could have documents
as target and there be no restriction on what is actually used for testing (tools, runtime, etc)
<Martin C>
its those that we test
Martin Chapman move to resolve issue 27 with the text posted with all lower must changed to MUST.
<Dave Booz>
An SCA runtime MUST reject a document that does not comply ...
<Dave Booz>
replaces "A SCA WS-BPEL Document is a document that complies "
Motion is approved with no objections.
Resolution: Issue 27 is resolved with proposal at http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200902/msg00029.html (with s/must/MUST/g)
Schreiber diagnostics output
[Delete this section before publishing the minutes]
final validation: Title not specified, default title 'OASIS SCA-BPEL TC...' was assumed
statistics: Schreiber found 139 input lines
edits: Schreiber found the following text-edit commands:
edits: Line 103: Martin C: s/must/MUST/
edits: Line 205: Danny van der Rijn: s/must /MUST/
citation-detection-irc1: Line 12: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 20: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 26: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 28: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'http'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 31: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'PR draft ready'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 32: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'PR vote'
citation-detection-irc1: Line 49: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'Proposal at http'
command-scribe: Line 60: Najeeb Andrabi recognized
command-scribe: Schreiber detected that this section was scribed online
edit-substitute: command on line 103 succeeded, changed line 101 from 'must' to 'MUST'
edit-delete: Line 103 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 205 succeeded, changed line 203 from 'must ' to 'MUST'
edit-delete: Line 205 was deleted
citation-detection-irc1: Line 213: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'anish time chk'
system: Transformer: SAXON 9.0.0.2
[End of Schreiber diagnostic output]