|Anish Karmarkar||Jan 31, 2008 9:06 am|
|Subject:||Raw chat log of 2008-01-31 telcon|
|From:||Anish Karmarkar (Anis...@oracle.com)|
|Date:||Jan 31, 2008 9:06:45 am|
Khanderao: Approval of last minutes:http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00027.html
Khanderao: Meetings approved unanimously
Khanderao: No open action item
Dieter Koenig: sca http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca/200712 sca-bpel (defined here) http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-bpel/200801
Khanderao: Action Item for chairs to a follow up with Mary to post of the docs to OASIS repository
anish: action: chairs: to a follow up with Mary to post of the docs to OASIS repository
anish: f2f meeting: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00037.html
Khanderao: 7. Spring F2F meeting http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00037.html
Khanderao: Discussion related to F2F on May 2-3
anish: hotel details: http://events.oasis-open.org/home/symposium/2008/hotel-venue.
anish: action: chairs to confirm the f2f date with Jane
Khanderao: 8. New Issues a. http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BPEL-17 Allow Component Type side file to override defaults for service/reference
Khanderao: moved:Khanderao second:Dieter Koenig
Khanderao: motion accepted unanimously
Khanderao: 9. Issue Discussion
Khanderao: a) Issue 2 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BPEL-2 TITLE: Does the spec allow a componentType side file SUBMITTED BY: Anish Karmarkar Email thread: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200710/msg00040.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200710/msg00041.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200710/msg00042.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200710/msg00043.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200710/msg00044.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200710/msg00048.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200710/msg00049.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200710/msg00055.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200711/msg00003.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00006.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00008.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00017.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00022.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00024.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00025.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00026.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00029.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00030.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00031.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00032.html
Khanderao: The discussion is postponed for future meeting(s)
Khanderao: b) Issue 15 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BPEL-15 TITLE: Define Conformance Targets SUBMITTED BY: Martin Chapman
Khanderao: NartinC updated discussions in the liaison committee: Three targets 1. Document 2. Elements in document 3. Runtime behavior
Khanderao: Anish: should we have course grain targets or fine grain targets?
Khanderao: MartinC: We have three choices from targets to choose fine grain or coarse grain.
Khanderao: MikeE: Its not a choice between three but how we apply fine and coarse grain choice of the targets
Khanderao: Mike Edwards: TC's need to write with RFC-2119 and every time we reach RFC-2119 statement we would have a conformance rule
Khanderao: Anish: Do we need Assembly-TC to define the targets?
Khanderao: Summary: Each TC needs to decide the targets however need to be done in a consistent way across TCs
anish: Action: Martin to write up a proposal for issue 15
Khanderao: We do not have an issue on re-writing specs with RFC-2119
Khanderao: action: Khanderao : file a new issue for re-writing specs with RFC-2119
Khanderao: e) Issue 16 http://osoa.org/jira/browse/BPEL-16 TITLE: Ambigous Service Resolution SUBMITTED BY: Dieter Koenig
anish: topic: issue 1
Khanderao: c) Issue 1 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BPEL-1 TITLE: support for BPEL4WS 1.1 SUBMITTED BY: Martin Chapman
Khanderao: MikeE: BPEL4WS 1.1 is not a standard hence we can not have a normative statements based on BPEL4WS 1.1
Khanderao: Khanderao: Isn't it a de-facto standard?
Khanderao: MikeE: It is dangerous to specify based on a de-facto standard.
Khanderao: Dieter: it is ok to write non-normative statements but not to write normative statements based on BPEL4WS1.1
Dieter Koenig: Motion: leave chapter 4 as-is and mark it as non-normative
anish: motion: m:dieter s:charlton leave chapter 4 as-is and mark it as non-normative
Khanderao: motion: Dieter second: Charlton
anish: amendment: m:martin s:charlton keep chapter 4 in sync with the rest of the spec
Khanderao: update amendment:Dany: Keeping in sync without making longer and have a flexibility to undo if decided later by the TC
anish: amended motion: leave chapter 4 as-is and mark it as non-normative, keep chapter 4 in sync with the rest of the spec
Khanderao: amendment 1 accepted unanimously
Khanderao: amendment 2 moved: Dany Second: Khanderao
anish: amendment: m:danny s:martin If the work of keeping chapter 4 in sync is too onerous then we remove chapter 4 (support for BPEL 1.1)
Khanderao: Dieter: we do not need to amendment as TC is free to make decision any time.
Khanderao: Dany: That would need TC to overturn previous resolution
Mike Edwards: table this for now
anish: meeting adjurned