sca-policy message

Subject: Raw text from Chat room, 5th November 2007

From: Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>
To: "OASIS Policy" <sca-policy@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 18:05:18 +0000

Folks,

Here is the raw text:

Dave Booz: Hi Bob, I forgot that we granted you an LOA. I'll restore your voting status
anish1 there is a best practice about reply rewriting for mailing lists, i'm trying to find it
Mike Edwards: 19 members out of 24 - quorate
Mike Edwards: 1. Roll call 2. Appointment of minute taker Mike Edwards 3. Agenda bashing 4. Vote to accept minutes from previous meetinghttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00116.html5. TC Document URL Structure Note From Graham Barberhttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00110.html5. ISSUES a. Required intents on interfaces Michael Rowley Final wording:http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00113.htmlMike Edwrads:http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00115.htmlb. Requirements for Policy Framework Documenthttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00046.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-13c. Intent/intentMap Relationshiphttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00043.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-10e. WS-I compliance versus QoS policyhttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00042.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-9f. Binding config relationship to policySethttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00044.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-11g. Annotations for policy intentshttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00045.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-12h. Binding hierarchies need to be considered in policyReference matchinghttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00047.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-14i. External mechanism for attaching intents or policySetshttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00048.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-15j, Targeting policySets to bingings.wshttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00049.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-16k. Need Transaction Policy Spechttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00050.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-17l. Should qualifiable intens have a default qualifier?http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00051.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-18m. Wiring from a reference with no binding to a service with a bindinghttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00085.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-34n. The ability to express capabilities via intentshttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00084.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-33o. Security intent which allows a client to authenticate a serverhttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00083.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-32p. Is it possible to use only a piece of a more general policy set?http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00082.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-31q. Is the policy (specified in intentMap) from all of multiple qualified intents in effect?http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00081.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-30r. Need more precision on when policies in a policySet are in effecthttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00080.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-29s. Add the ability to attach policy directly to an SCA compositehttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00079.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-28t. Operation level policy attachment is brokenhttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00078.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-27u. Security implementation should be validatable by schemahttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00077.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-26v. XPath expressions for intent@constrainshttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00076.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-25w. More direct structural qualifier definitionhttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00075.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-24x. Policy attachment at the message levelhttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00074.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-23y. Profile intent extension - provides other intentshttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00073.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-22z. always provides in binding specshttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00072.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-21aa. Should intents have a default policySethttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00071.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-20bb. Composite/Group Policyhttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200710/msg00070.htmlhttp://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-197. Conformance Start discussion about conformance. 8. Discussion re Framework spec and moving to Committee Draft 9. AOB 10. Any additions to the roll?
Mike Edwards: Agenda unchanged
Mike Edwards: Item 3 - Minutes from last meeting
Mike Edwards: Acceptance moved by Michael Rowley
Mike Edwards: Seconded Martin Chapman
Mike Edwards: Accepted unanimously.
Mike Edwards: Item 4 - TC Document URL structure
Mike Edwards: No progress - no new proposal to discuss.
Mike Edwards: Item 5 - Issues
Mike Edwards: Ashok asks us to start to consider conformance - what would THIS specification require for conformance
Mike Edwards: Ashok also saks whether we need to consider forming a conformance sub-committee....
Mike Edwards: Michael Rowley: First need to resolve what are the TARGETS for the conformance statements
Mike Edwards: ie, which software component is under consideration
Mike Edwards: eg.one aspect is the deployment code which must find the appropriate Policy Sets for the intents marked into the Composites
Mike Edwards: It is not clear whether the conformance stretches to interoperation testing (for example)
Mike Edwards: Anish: Another target is certain other types of SCA artifacts like composites
Mike Edwards: Anish: Doubtful whether we can do any wire-level interop
Mike Edwards: Michael Rowley: Not sure that we would be generating any test suite artifacts
Mike Edwards: Michael Rowley: An example might be violations of mutual exclusion of intents
Mike Edwards: Jacques: Useful to write test assertions - identify the artifacts under test and then express pre and post conditions on those artifacts
Mike Edwards: ....this is done before writing a test suite
anish1: another example: not policy related, but will folks an idea of what i'm talking about -- if my component type has a service with interface foo and the component configuration has an interface foo1 and foo and foo1 are not compatible then that is not conformant
anish1 morphed into anish
Mike Edwards: Martin: 3 things in here:
Mike Edwards: a) Define conformance language in the spec - need to identify targets
Mike Edwards: b) Test assertions based on the conformance statements
Mike Edwards: c) (out of scope) certification
Mike Edwards: Michael R: I'd expect the folks running the test to be implementers of SCA runtimes checking that their implementations meet the specs
Mike Edwards: Michael R: Best to specify things in concrete terms of error situations and the code expected to report them
Mike Edwards: Anish: Useful to think about conformance in both ways - ie X is invalid and the code should generate error Y when it detects that X has occurred
TomRutt: Two Examples of a possible spec conformance statments: "an element information item corresponding to an intent/policy statement used in an SCA document MUST be valid according to the XML Schema". "When an intent/policy is associated with an SCA element, that element MUST adhere to the constraints associated with the definition of that intent/policy statement"
Mike Edwards: Mike Edwards: Do expect to see runnable tests from this process, that anyone can run. May require cross-TC liaison on order to get these, but that is a natural consequence of the test
Mike Edwards: ***** Above was actually Item 7 on the agenda **********
Mike Edwards: Item 8
Mike Edwards: State of the Specification
Mike Edwards: Currently, Dave B is putting in the errata
Mike Edwards: aim to vote to get this to a committee draft in a week or two
Mike Edwards: there is a version of the document in the repository
Mike Edwards: Item 5 - Issues
anish should we try to figure out the priority here?
anish or even dependencies?
anish unless we have concrete proposals or directions to talk about
Mike Edwards: Issue 7
Mike Edwards: Mike Edwards moves the text of message 115 as the resolution of Issue 7
Mike Edwards: Michael Rowley seconds
Mike Edwards: Accepted unanimously
Mike Edwards: Issue 13
Mike Edwards: Requirements for Policy Framework Document
anish: i agree as well
anish: CNA
Mike Edwards: Anish moves to Close this issue with no action
Mike Edwards: Michael R seconds
Mike Edwards: Accepted unanimously
Eric Wells: My cell phine is dying but I will stay in the chat room.
Mike Edwards: Issue 10
Mike Edwards: Intent/IntentMap Relationship
anish: DESCRIPTION : What does it mean when there is no intentMap for an intent mentioned in the policySet's @provides attribute?
Ashok Malhotra: DESCRIPTION : What does it mean when there is no intentMap for an intent mentioned in the policySet's @provides attribute?
Ashok Malhotra: The above is issue 10
Mike Edwards: Mike Edwards: Argue that there is no problem of interpretation here - it is valid to have a Intent declared on a PolicySet without an intentmap
Michael Rowley: Starting at line 1130:
Michael Rowley: A policySet matches a required intent if any of the following are true: 1.The required intent matches a provides intent in a policySet exactly. 2.The provides intent is a parent (e.g. prefix) of the required intent (in this case the policySet must have an intentMap entry for the requested qualifier) 3.The provides intent is more qualified than the required intent.
Mike Edwards: There is also lines 243 - 289 describing the structure of a PolicySet
Mike Edwards: which does not state that an intent provided by the PolicySet must be matched by an IntentMap - and indeed has an example which does not use an IntentMap
anish: another CNA
Mike Edwards: Michael Rowley moves to close Issue 10 with no action
Mike Edwards: Michael Rowley moves to close Issue 10 with no action
Mike Edwards: Mike Edwards seconds
Mike Edwards: Accepted unanimously
Mike Edwards: Issue 17 - Need Transaction Policy Spec
anish: i think we should wait till it gets submitted, from a process POV
anish: that is also not fair to folks who are in the TC but not in OSOA
Mike Edwards: Mike Edwards: think this should stay on the books until there is a formal submission
Mike Edwards: Issue 9 -
Mike Edwards: WS-I compliance versus QoS policy
Ashok Malhotra: DESCRIPTION : Both can be expressed with WS-Policy, what position will we take? Should WS-I semantics be expressed in policy?
Mike Edwards: ACTION: Ashok to clarify the meaning of this Issue on the email list.
Mike Edwards: End of meeting

Yours, Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431
Email: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU