OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsdm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [wsdm] [Omod] Oct 28 call agenda

Title: [Omod] Oct 28 call agenda

1. Roll : Heather, FredC, William, Zulah, BrianM, Alexandro, MarkP, Andrea

2. Approve corrected minutes http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00113.html  


3. Review action items
ACTION: Fred to provide text for the ISSUE 3. (aggregation of manageability to the endpoint level is a responsibility of the provider of manageability) [http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00122.html] 

Fred presented his proposal.

[brief discussion & clarifications not captured]

DECISION: use Fred's proposed text for the issue 3 and close the issue

ACTION: William to provide text on inferring manageability of a service from manageable endpoints (generally, no specifics of how) 

William presented his proposal.

Group decisded to postpone discussions until everybody's got a chance to review the text.

ACTION: BrianC to align the versioning/revision/change detail UML diagram with the MOWS Concepts diagram and incorporate "versioned X is an X" elements. 


4. Review issues
ISSUE 5: using http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00067.html UML approach
ACTION: BrianC to attempt to express ManageableEndpointState UML information model linked directly to the web service endpoint state diagrams designed by the W3C Arch MTF. See http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00084.html

Igor's simplified proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00082.html and other possible choices http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00083.html  

Igor presented the proposal.

Heather: how is the optionality represented?

Igor: by cardinality of an element [0..1] means optional [1] means mandatory

Heather: what do +/- mean?

Igor: writeable and read-only properties.

Heather: thought that +/- represented optionality.

Mark: wants UML 2.0 compliance of the diagram, and no problems otherwise

Fred: UML 2.0 says that readonly must be represented by a {constraint}

Igor: yes, but it clutters the digram a lot

Mark: agrees

Igor: read only can be represented by a stereotype <<ro>>, although that would make it look like an <<event>> and may raise some questions.

Mark: would the group agree to use this approach as long as it is UML 2.0 compliant?

No objections.

ACTION: Igor to research how to pretty-up the presented UML diagram to be UML 2.0 compliant with respect to readonly modifier and research how to hide +/- if they are not used in the diagram.

ISSUE 6: There is a need for another diagram to display the "locus of implementation" concepts.
Essentially the diagram to depict relationships between manageable endpoint in MOWS Concepts and manageability endpoint in MUWS.

ACTION: Igor to provide "locus of implementation" concepts diagram for MOWS.
See http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00076.html  

Igor: presented the diagram.

The diagram itself did not raise concerns, but...

Heather, Zulah: need some text to match the diagram, text in the e-mail won't do.

Fred: sent the proposed text to the WSDM list and quoted it to the group.

Igor: is it ok to move on agreeing to use the diagram and Fred's text to close the issue 6.

Group did not object, Mark wanted to read the text in the e-mail.

Issue stays open until e-mail discussion on the Fred's text confirms that it is ok to close it.

ISSUE 7: another diagram that shows relationships of MUWS and MOWS concepts (possibly aggregation/composition of manageability capabilities).  

Igor: issue was raised after the drafting of the MOWS concepts diagram F2F in Cupertino. If we combine MUWS + MOWS concepts diagram and a proposed sample manageability capability diagram discussed for the issue 5, we get everything necessary. Not sure why anything else is necessary. Combined the diagrams express that MOWS manageability capability "is a" MUWS manageability capability and a manageable endpoint may aggregate many manageability capabilities of MOWS and MUWS kinds. That should be sufficient.

Igor: this issue could be retired (closed with no actions on it).

keep open until Zulah's input 

ISSUE 8: performance vs metrics: can we stick to slide 17 or should the category be renamed to "Performance" instead of "Metrics" See e-mail thread.

DECSION: move this discussion to UArch and for now stick to categorization expressed on slide 17

ISSUE 9: need to start the document with concepts + models

Igor: intention is to stitch the information (diagrams & text) that we have discussed and had recorded the consensus about into a document so that we can (1) keep discussions consistent (2) deliver an adqueate output of this task force
discussed whether we need a separate document or can start MOWS document and fill in the details
DECISION: start the MOWS document
ACTION: Igor to start the MOWS document outline and fill in the parts that we have already dicussed and recorded the decisions for (e.g. diagrams, text in e-mails)
Igor: we need to produce models with actual props/events/ops by Nov 1st and so far we have discussed all the peripheral stuff as we had to move back to basics. To deliver we need to work on concrete proposals on our next call. Earlier I have provided WS-Manageability models forematted in the framework of MUWS/MOWS concepts (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00067.html). We can either use it as a starting point and add/remove or have a similarly expressed other proposals that we can combine into one model.
Heather: is there a way to provide a similar model for WSMF so that we can be comparing apples to apples?
William kindly agreed to provide a model for WSMF.
ACTION:  William to provide a model of WSMF managing a web service endpoint expressed in UML similarly to http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00067.html
ACTION: Igor to send visio file to William.

Plan for next call: discuss the document and model proposals so that we can combine them

 Note: other issues are retired until reoccurance. Decsions were made and action items taken on the retired issues.

-- Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]