IRC log of ws-arch on 2002-06-06
- [Roger]
- zakim, who is here?
- [Zakim]
- I see +1.503.712.aaaa, ??P8
- [Roger]
- zakim, ??p8 is Roger.Cutler
- zakim, who is here?
- [Zakim]
- I see +1.503.712.aaaa, Roger.Cutler
- [chris]
- agenda+ 1. Roll call, scribes for minutes/action items (15.30 +
5)
- agenda+ 2. Agenda review, and AOB (15.35 + 5)
- agenda+ 3. Review and approval of 16 & 30 May telcon
minutes [2,3] (15.40 + 5)
- agenda+ 4. Review action items [4] (15.45 + 5)
- agenda+ 5. Status (15.50 + 20)
- agenda+ 6. Review of editor's draft snapshot documents for f2f
review (16.10 + 10)
- agenda+ 7. F2F Agenda review (16.20 + 15)
- agenda+ 8. Proposed replacement text for D-AC009 (16:35 +
10)
- agenda+ 9. Wrap up/AOB items (16.45 + 15)
- zakim, agenda?
- [Zakim]
- I see 9 items remaining on the agenda:
- 1. 1. Roll call, scribes for minutes/action items (15.30 + 5)
[from chris]
- 2. 2. Agenda review, and AOB (15.35 + 5) [from chris]
- 3. 3. Review and approval of 16 & 30 May telcon minutes
[2,3] (15.40 + 5) [from chris]
- [dbooth]
- zakim, aabb is Mike.Brumbelow
- [Zakim]
- 4. 4. Review action items [4] (15.45 + 5) [from chris]
- 5. 5. Status (15.50 + 20) [from chris]
- 6. 6. Review of editor's draft snapshot documents for f2f
review (16.10 + 10) [from chris]
- 7. 7. F2F Agenda review (16.20 + 15) [from chris]
- 8. 8. Proposed replacement text for D-AC009 (16:35 + 10) [from
chris]
- 9. 9. Wrap up/AOB items (16.45 + 15) [from chris]
- [hima]
- zakim, ??P14 is hima
- [AlanD]
- zakim, ??P19 is probably AlanD
- [dbooth]
- zakim, aaee is Alex.Cheng
- [Zakim]
- sorry, dbooth, I do not recognize a party named 'aaee'
- [dbooth]
- zakim, ScottV? is Alex.Cheng
- [hugo]
- Zakim, Bert has Hugo
- [dbooth]
- zakim, aadd is Mario.Jeckle
- zakim, aacc may be Francis.McCabe
- [hima]
- Hima Scribe
- [Kreger]
- yes
- [hima]
- CF: Review of Agenda
- [chris]
- zakim, agenda?
- [Zakim]
- I see 9 items remaining on the agenda:
- 1. 1. Roll call, scribes for minutes/action items (15.30 + 5)
[from chris]
- 2. 2. Agenda review, and AOB (15.35 + 5) [from chris]
- 3. 3. Review and approval of 16 & 30 May telcon minutes
[2,3] (15.40 + 5) [from chris]
- 4. 4. Review action items [4] (15.45 + 5) [from chris]
- 5. 5. Status (15.50 + 20) [from chris]
- 6. 6. Review of editor's draft snapshot documents for f2f
review (16.10 + 10) [from chris]
- 7. 7. F2F Agenda review (16.20 + 15) [from chris]
- 8. 8. Proposed replacement text for D-AC009 (16:35 + 10) [from
chris]
- 9. 9. Wrap up/AOB items (16.45 + 15) [from chris]
- [hima]
- CF: David, Action Items
- [hugo]
- Agenda for F2F: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/06/wsawg-f2f-jun2002
- [chris]
- telcon for f2f needs discussion
- [hima]
- CF: Talk about lack of telcon for F2F, addittion to agenda
- CF: Agenda item 3, Approval of minutes, Minutes are aproved and
published
- CF: Agenda Item 4, Action items
- [dbooth]
- Previous action items: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/05/30-minutes#new-ai
- [hugo]
- ACTION: Editors to remove the Draft status and clean up the
wording of D-AR012.5 (fix the word "levels") [PENDING]
- [dbooth]
- Items done:
- [[
- ]]
- [hugo]
- dbooth, we didn't see anything from you
- [dbooth]
- Evidentally I pasted too much and got disconnected.
- [hima]
- CF: Agenda Item 5, STatus report
- [hugo]
- Minutes: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/cg/2/06/04-minutes
- [hima]
- CF: Talk about coordination between XMLP and WSD, Have two
groups work on understanding each others effort.
- [dbooth]
- GlenD, Are you and TomJ calling from the DoubleTreeSJ
again?
- [hima]
- CF: Also talked about joint F2F, this working group volunteer
for maintaing message exchange
- HH: Not sure about signing up this WG
- [dbooth]
- zakim, DoubleTreeSJ probably has GlenD, TomJ
- [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'DoubleTreeSJ probably has GlenD, TomJ',
dbooth. Try /msg Zakim help
- [hima]
- HH: Signing up for this and not bother the WG
- CF: NExt agenda item, F2F update
- CF: Required reading for F2F, No telcon access, possible IRC
access
- DB: Hasn't heard about IRC access
- CF: Feelings on no telcon access
- CF: Issues is dialout from hosting facilities
- DB: NO equipment and cost of dialing international, issue with
no telcon
- CF: ANy one else interested in attending by phone
- About 6 people interested in dialing in
- CF: Talk about distributing costs between participants
- AB: may be able to look into providing telecon access
- [dbooth]
- ACTION: Abi to look into arranging a teleconf bridge located in
France
- [hima]
- ??: Any internet access
- [chris]
- ACTION 2=Abbie to look into arranging a teleconf bridge located
in France
- [hima]
- CF: Not sure...
- CF: David posted information about dinner.
- JM: Question about working draft, 2 versions of arch reqs
- JM: Look at 05 june 2002 version
- AB: Editors draft, done
- CF: Selected editors for arch document. Offered help.
- AB: Atleast one editor from UC to be part of architecture
editors
- AB: Feels that will provide continuity from requirements
document to arch.
- Dave: Chris can do that.
- CF will be the 4th editor
- CF: Can someone on USTF give report from last weeks
meeting
- DaveO: Providing report. Lot of debate about different words
like "sample applications", etc.
- DaveO: PRoviding technical scenarios against business
scenarios.
- DaveO: Bulk of time on terminology. Not reviewed any of the
usage scenarios.
- CF: Any questions? None
- SD: Reliability report. DAG007, possibly belongs to team goal.
Do some sort of sanitization before that.
- CF: ANy target dates?
- SD: No
- CF: Agenda item 6, Review of editors draft
- CF: Required reading for F2F, requirements, glossary and
uc
- CF: couple of weeks after F2F publish the requirements
documents, consensus with requirements document - show to
folks
- CF: Make some progress on document sent out by david. End of
july to publish our documents. Need to make some significant
progress.
- SK: WIll security UC be talked about in F2F
- CF: Time is running out and lot of work to do.
- CF: Glossary is required reading.
- CF: Link in email sent out by chris last night
- CF: Requirement document has been updated to include all the
discussion and concensus
- CF: F2F Agenda review
- [chris]
- http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/06/wsawg-f2f-jun2002
- [hima]
- CF: F2F Agenda is on the WG administrative site
- CF: Will have an editors meeting on 11 th, joint meeting on
12th with WSD
- [dbooth]
- rrsagent, where am i?
- [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2002/06/06-ws-arch-irc#T20-18-21
- [hima]
- CF: Each chair will give direction for each group and followed
by presentation by daveO about usage scenario
- [dbooth]
- zakim, who is here?
- [Zakim]
- I see +1.503.712.aaaa, Roger.Cutler, R.Radhika, DavidB,
Mike.Brumbelow (muted), Radhika.Roy, Dougb?, Abbie, Hima, ??P16,
??P17, AlanD?, Prasad.Yendluri, ??P18, Chris.Ferris,
- [hima]
- CF: Review feedback received until noon tommorrow.
- [Zakim]
- ... Francis.McCabe?, ??P25 (muted), Mario.Jeckle, Alex.Cheng,
??P29, ??P31, Igor.Sedukhin, ??P33, Bert, ??P34, M.Champion, ??P2,
DoubleTreeSJ, Tim.Jones, +1.650.875.aaff, ??P27
- Bert has Hugo
- [hima]
- CF: Action to review feedback received for WSD
- CF: Action to send our URL to feedback
- [dbooth]
- ACTION: Chris to send out URL to feedback after the call.
- [hima]
- DaveO: Pick easy MEP and dive through one.
- CF: Seems reasonable.
- CF: Followed by review of glossary, publish this as working
draft soon after
- DaveO: Sent first draft out, Chris will put it.
- Action for Chris: Put DaveO Arch document on CVS.
- [dbooth]
- ACTION: Chris to put DaveO Arch document on CVS
- [hima]
- CF: Thursday lunch, semantic web presentation, optional,
possible demo
- CF: Afternoon session, usage scnearios discussions, possible
work out some details.
- CF: Friday rough scoping of security WG
- CF: Finish by doing minor admin stuff, etc.
- DaveO: How many people there for entire day or saturday
- CF: Add more to agenda if more people staying..
- DaveO: Could take a look at Security portion of Arch
document..
- DaveO: Talk about security, not separated by document
- DaveO: Don't have to separate dicussion about security in
context of 4 documents.
- DaveO: Pick 3 scenarios. What does this mean from glossary,
what it means from usage perspective, what it means from
architecture perspective, what it means from requirement
perspective
- AB: Can we comeup with one document.
- CF: We aren't coming up with a security document.
- CF: Next Agenda item.
- CF: Bring closure to semantic web req AC009
- CF: Someone had a counter proposal feeling that current didn't
capture completely, Chris feels SW taking away from focus
- Frank: Feels it's written in slightly negative way, Blvs there
is another CSF - important to figure out what services they can
use.
- Frank: THis is not expressed anywhere in requirements doc. We
are customers of output of semantic web initiative.
- Frank: What it means to be aligned with semantic web??
- CF: Feedback was that SW was put in a superior position
compared to this group.
- CF: After working on the req based on feedback, current
statement was arrived at
- EN: Should ensure that there is a compromise between 2
worlds
- Frank: What is the CSF that has to do anything with SW?
- DA: 1 political, 2 compatibility
- DB: not really political, 2 things, use of URI and desire to
make information machine understandable.
- [Dave]
- can we use the queue?
- [chris]
- yes
- [hima]
- Joe: Quite reasonable, promote machine-machine interaction,
hoping that david booth will clarify
- DaveO: Loosely coupled, We don't have to do lots for alignment
with semantic web. TAG is not just for semantic web - not semantic
web enforcement
- Frank: OUtput of this WG should have a set of requirements for
SW initiative
- Frank: We need another CSF, services to be fully semantically
describable
- [chris]
- web services are fully semantically describable
- ?
- [hima]
- DaveO: "Aligned" open of interpretation, from orig CSF
- DB: "ALigned" intent was use of URI, and machine processable
description
- CF: Just pick a word and move on
- DB: Aligned in following sense and list the 2 things.
- DaveO: URI is a web thing and not a semantic thing.
- HH: Not only political...
- CF: Can we go with proposal that david, chris and Hugo came up
with?
- CF: Proposal listed in the agenda.....
- CF: Anyone who cannot live with that? None
- 615456362856
- CF: ANy objections to 4 & 5? No objections.
- Done with meeting
- [dbooth]
- rrsagent, where am i?
- [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2002/06/06-ws-arch-irc#T21-02-57
- [chris]
- hk, r, ad, igor, fm, sg, hh, cf
- do
- what are we going to call these things?
- [hugo]
- RRSAgent, what actions?
- [RRSAgent]
- I see 4 action items:
- ACTION: Editors to remove the Draft status and clean up the
wording of D-AR012.5 (fix the word "levels") [PENDING] [1]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/06-ws-arch-irc#T19-47-07
- ACTION: Abbie to look into arranging a teleconf bridge located
in France [2]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/06-ws-arch-irc#T19-59-12
- ACTION: Chris to send out URL to feedback after the call.
[3]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/06-ws-arch-irc#T20-20-11
- ACTION: Chris to put DaveO Arch document on CVS [4]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2002/06/06-ws-arch-irc#T20-24-11
- [chris]
- e.g. rational has use cases (high level) and path through that
is called usage scenari
- cf: can we pick some names and move on?
- mj: not in favor of calling security a use scenario
- if we choose these names, need to be explained
- cf: chair sez that we will go with high-level=use case
lower-level or instance/path=scenario
- per roger clearly in the use case document
- [frankmcca]
- The UML reference manual:
- [chris]
-
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-arch/2002May/0246.html
- hao: thought that original doc too technical/detailed, need
high-level classifications
- daveo: take use cases and put them in the use case doc, call it
sect 0, when we get down to usage scenario (sec, reliability,
messaging, etc.) we reference back to use case
- hao: yes, that sounds reasonable
- igor: says he put out email that added conceptual
level/categorization e.g. intermediary which is neither technical
nor business level
-
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002May/0455.html
- igor's proposal for business, conceptual and technical
classification of use cases
- do: is the notion of concept an attribute?
- igor, would like to have classification
- do: stock quote is use case
- igor: want tree or list when click on and get list of use cases
(or usage scenarios) that map to that
- do: let's keep that in mind as we go forward
- do: let's actually start working on these things
- do: definitely something there
- markh: typically 3 kinds of (in)formal relationships; incusion,
generalization, extension
- extension is more formal, take use case and add elements to
it
- mark: if we organize these things, use typical mechanisms
- igor: discussed including all wsd use cases, only way to do
that is take their doc and dump them in. doc becomes 600 pages of
who knows what
- do: scenarios doc already has ids
- do: chose numbers or strings, don't care
- igor: how do we assign these numbers?
- do: went by what structure was in the document
- [frankmcca]
- Sorry, gotto go
- [chris]
- do: maybe bit of issue in terms of the ids
- [Zakim]
- WS_ArchWG()3:30PM has ended
- [chris]
- rrsagent, please excuse us
Roll
Present
Apple
Mike Brumbelow
AT&T
Ayse Dilber
BEA Systems David Orchard
ChevronTexaco
Roger Cutler
Cisco Systems Inc Sandeep Kumar
Computer Associates Igor Sedukhin
CrossWeave, Inc. Timothy Jones
DaimlerChrysler Mario Jeckle
Documentum
Don Robertson
Exodus/Digital Island Joseph Hui
Fujitsu
Frank McCabe
Hewlett-Packard Company Yin-Leng Husband
Hewlett-Packard Company Zulah Eckert
IBM
Heather Kreger
Intel Corporation Sharad Garg
IONA
Eric Newcomer
Ipedo
Alex Cheng
MartSoft Corp. Jin Yu
Microsoft Corporation Allen Brown
Microsoft Corporation Henrik Nielsen
MITRE Corporation James Davenport
MITRE Corporation Paul Denning
Nortel Networks Abbie Barbir
Oracle Corporation Martin Chapman
Oracle Corporation Jeff Mischkinsky
SeeBeyond Technology Corp Alan Davies
Software AG Michael Champion
Sterling Commerce(SBC) Suresh Damodaran
Sun Microsystems, Inc. Chris Ferris
Sun Microsystems, Inc. Doug Bunting
Sybase, Inc. Himagiri Mukkamala
The Thomson Corporation Hao He
W. W. Grainger, Inc. Tom Carroll
W. W. Grainger, Inc. Daniel Austin
W3C
Hugo Haas
W3C
David Booth
webMethods, Inc. Prasad Yendluri
Regrets
Boeing Company Gerald Edgar
Carnegie Mellon University Katia Sycara
Ericsson
Nilo Mitra
IONA
Steve Vinoski
Ipedo
Srinivas Pandrangi
Nokia
Michael Mahan
Planetfred, Inc. Mark Baker
Rogue Wave Software David Noor
SAP
Sinisa Zimek
Systinet
Anne Thomas Manes
TIBCO Software, Inc. Scott Vorthmann
T-Nova Deutsche Telekom Innovationsgesellschaft Jens Meinkoehn
Waveset Technologies Darran Rolls
Absent
Artesia Technologies Dipto Chakravarty
AT&T
Mark Jones
Cisco Systems Inc Krishna Sankar
Contivo
Dave Hollander
DaimlerChrysler Hans-Peter Steiert
DISA
Marcel Jemio
EDS
Mike Ballantyne
EDS
Waqar Sadiq
France Telecom Shishir Garg
IBM
Jim Knutson
Intalio Inc Bob Lojek
Intel Corporation Joel Munter
Macromedia
Glen Daniels
Macromedia
Tom Jordahl
MartSoft Corp. Jun Chen
Rogue Wave Software Patrick Thompson
Software AG Nigel Hutchison
Sun Microsystems, Inc. Mark Hapner
VeriSign, Inc. Michael Mealling
XQRL Inc. Tom Bradford
XQRL Inc. Daniela Florescu