Re: [ws-caf] Draft Minutes Confcall 21/6

["Mark Little" <mark.little@arjuna.com>]

Peter, apologies because I thought we'd discussed anything relevant to the
1.0 version of the specification.

I'm also happy to have a telecon. on the 5th. In fact I thought we'd agreed
that yesterday?

Mark.

----
Mark Little,
Chief Architect, Transactions,
Arjuna Technologies Ltd.

www.arjuna.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Furniss, Peter" <Peter.Furniss@choreology.com>
To: <ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 2:40 AM
Subject: RE: [ws-caf] Draft Minutes Confcall 21/6


> 1. There are a number of fairly significant issues outstanding on
ws-context, for which there has been little discussion since the issues were
singled out (apart from some input from Alastair).  When are these going to
be discussed.
>
> 2.  Draft 0.3 is substantially different (and much better) but clearly
(from these minutes), people haven't had time to digest it and its
implications yet. If we are to produce a standard of quality, it doesn't
seem to be a good move to set a closing date for issues less than 2 weeks
from now. I strongly agree that standards need to be timely as well as
correct (indeed, I have an aphorism that the date on a standard should be
treated as a technical issue - a late 'perfect' standard is of lower quality
than a timely, reasonably good one), but on the other hand we shouldn't let
ourselves be enslaved by a timetable - which like all such, was very
optomistic.
>
> 3. The habit of this group has been to have TC meetings even if the day in
question is a public holiday for several participants, but not for all. :-).
Is there a meeting on 5th July ?
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guy Pardon [mailto:guy@atomikos.com]
> Sent: Mon 6/21/2004 5:25 PM
> To: ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org
> Cc:
> Subject: [ws-caf] Draft Minutes Confcall 21/6
>
>
> Below is the draft for the minutes. As soon as I get the roll call I will
insert that information...
>
> Guy
>
> WS-CAF Phone Conference, June 21, 2004
>
> 1. Roll call: no quorum at beginning of meeting (only later).
>
> 2. Assign scribe: volunteer Guy Pardon
>
> 3. ACTION: Implementation group:
> -Planning tests this week or next one (interop tests between Oracle and
Arjuna).
> -A port number will be published so everyone interested can participate in
the tests.
>
> 4. General discussion:
>
> -Should next confcall proceed as normal? (July 5th is holiday in US). The
next F2F is July 12th and should close the CTX part with a demo.
>
> (Martin joins, so there is a quorum now)
>
> 5. Agenda review:
>
> -Minutes approval
> -Review the specs and
> -Discuss the logistics for F2F.
> -Any more outstanding action items? No.
>
> 6. Minutes:
>
> -Outstanding minutes from previous meetings? Appears not to be the case.
Can always be deferred if there are any.
>
> 8. Review of spec draft
>
> -Any comments on last draft 0.3?
> -Guy: still didn't see any answers to the questions I posted (how is an
active subcontext set to FAIL_ONLY)?
> Mark: this and the termination status were removed in F2F in New Orleans.
> -Martin: Activity def seems to be more of an introductory topic than
deserving its own chapter.
> -Doug: agreed, because Activity is the first concept that needs to be
introduced. It supports the notion of context.
>
> (Simeon joins meeting)
> (Some discussion: there were people who couldn't get on the call. Were
they using the right numbers? An email will be sent to the group.)
>
> -Tony: didn't get a chance to read the specs yet. We might come back to
this later on the next call, since then also other people will be able to
attend.
> -Some background on the 0.3 draft motivation:
> -try to resolve some issues from the F2F in New Orleans
> -combined Activity and CTX service
> -clarify whether there is one or more contexts per activity and so on
> -Mark: the major change is ALS removal, pushing everything to the back.
>
> -Bryan Murray: Section 5: there is no indication of what the message looks
like. How does someone determine the right XML format?
> The WSDL is also non-prescriptive on this. For instance, the begin
message:
> how can one determine this from the spec if the WSDL and Schema aren't
normative?
> Answer from Mark: the WSDL and schema are (should be) normative!
>
> -This spec should be closed at the F2F. Are there any things to settle in
between?
> There should be a deadline for comments and issues. Is no later than July
2nd OK?
> (No objections.)
>
> 9. Next confcall
> -Do we need the next confcall on the 5th? It wouldn't harm to summarize
during that confcall, so let's keep it.
>
> 10. Anything about the F2F plans or logistics?
>
> -Martin: I will post logistic info.
> -The first 2 days are in the conference center (12,13) and the 14th is in
one of the meeting rooms.
> -The agenda will be worked out in more detail by the end of the week.
> -Major goals are closing the spec and doing the interop demo.
> -Another major item: getting started on the next spec.
> -ACTION point for everyone: read the next (CF) spec draft so we can start
that discussion on the F2F!
> -Another point is to review the timetable for the rest of this TC work.
>
> (Simeon: is it Alex who is going to publish an end-point? No, Malik.)
>
> Any other things to discuss?
>
> No. Meeting adjourned. Next call is on the 5th.
>
>
>
>
>
>