Raw transcript of 2/14/08 conf-call

Title: Raw transcript of 2/14/08 conf-call

anonymous morphed into Simon Holdsworth

Simon Holdsworth: Audio conference:

Meeting Number: * 913929 * (press * before and after the digits)

Phone numbers:

Austria = Vienna 026822056419

Belgium = Brussels 022901709

China Toll Free = China North 108007121722, China South 108001201722

Denmark = Copenhagen 32714982

France = Paris 0170994364, Lyon 0426840196, Marseilles 0488915310

Germany = Berlin 030726167296, Frankfurt 069710445413, Hamburg 040809020620, Munich 089244432767, Stuttgart 0711490813212, Dusseldorf 021154073845

India Toll Free = 0008001006703

Ireland = Dublin 014367612

Italy = Milan 0230413007, Rome 06452108288, Turin 01121792100

Japan = Tokyo 0357675037

Netherlands = Amsterdam 0207965349

Portugal = Lisbon 211200415

Russia Toll Free = 81080022074011

Spain = Barcelona: 934923140, Madrid: 917889793

Sweden = Stockholm 0850520404

Switzerland = Geneva 0225927186

UK Toll Free = 08003581667

UK Toll = London 02071542988, Manchester 01612500379, Birmingham 01212604587

USA Toll Free = 18665289390

USA Toll = 19543344789

Simon Holdsworth: 1. Opening

Introductions

Roll call

Scribe assignment

Top 10 on the scribe list (full list below):

Anish Karmarkar Oracle Corporation

Sanjay Patil SAP AG

Laurent Domenech TIBCO Software Inc.

Nimish Hathalia TIBCO Software Inc.

Eric Johnson TIBCO Software Inc.

Michael Rowley BEA Systems, Inc.

Bryan Aupperle IBM

Tom Rutt Fujitsu Limited

David Booz IBM

Michael Beisiegel IBM

Agenda bashing

2. Approval of minutes of SCA-Binding TC meeting of 31st January

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/27067/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202008-01-31.doc

3. Actions

o [Simon Holdsworth] Submit updated proposal for resolution to issue 18

4. New Issues

http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-22

Bindings specifications should provide exemplary Implementations for Callbacks and Conversations

[Mike Edwards]

5. Face to Face topics

Discuss/suggest topics for the face to face meeting 1st week in March. Initial suggested set of possible topics:

a) Conformance statements in the specs

b) Testing - how, who, etc.

c) Walkthrough initial JCA binding draft

d) Plan of work, targets for spec completion

e) Any new bindings to consider

f) Existing issues that require discussion

6. Open Issue Discussion

Open issues with proposed resolutions:

http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-18

Clarify the rules on which queues and topics are used for responses and callbacks [Simon Holdsworth]

Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200802/msg00007.html

http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-19

Web Service binding should allow #wsdl.binding with reference targets [Simon Nash] Proposal in issue

http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-21

Support for callback and conversation ID-s in bindings

[Peter Peshev] Proposal in issue

http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-13

What namespace(s) do we use for each binding? [Martin Chapman] Some discussion on last call

6 AOB 

Simon Holdsworth: Agenda

Sanjay: scribe: Sanjay

Sanjay: topic: 2. Approval of minutes of SCA-Binding TC meeting of 31st January

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/27067/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202008-01-31.doc 

Sanjay: approved unanimously

Sanjay: topic: 3. Actions

o [Simon Holdsworth] Submit updated proposal for resolution to issue 18 

Sanjay: Done

Sanjay: topic: 4. New Issues

http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-22

Bindings specifications should provide exemplary Implementations for Callbacks and Conversations

[Mike Edwards] 

Simon Holdsworth: At present, it is not clear which, if any, of the Bindings specifications enable the implementation of two important features of SCA described in the Assembly specification - namely Callback interfaces and Conversational interfaces.

Each of the Bindings specifications should explicitly declare if it is possible to support each of these features.

For each of the Bindings specifications that claim to support either or both of these features, the specification should provide a full description of at least one exemplary implementation of the feature using the Binding technology described in the specification. Multiple alternative implementations are permitted and may be added to the specification.

For example, it may be possible to implement Callbacks using WS-Addressing capabilities with Web services. If so, and example, showing the use of appropriate features of WS-Addressing and other relevant WS-* capabilities should be added to the specification. If an alternative exists using (say) WS-Context, then an example based on that technology can also be provided. 

Sanjay: topic: 5. Face to Face topics 

Sanjay: a) Conformance statements in the specs

Sanjay: b) Testing - how, who, etc.

c) Walkthrough initial JCA binding draft

d) Plan of work, targets for spec completion

e) Any new bindings to consider

f) Existing issues that require discussion

6. Open Issue Discussion

Mike Edwards: I am back on now

Sanjay: switched topic to 4: New issues

Sanjay: Simon: there is an open issue for support for conversation in ws binding

Sanjay: No objections to f2f agenda proposal

Sanjay: back to topic 4: New issues - http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-22

Sanjay: Bryan: is the question - which of the assembly capabilities are supported by a binding and what is normatively supported by a binding

Sanjay: Eric: Mike's wording speaks of exemplary implementations. Don't see a problem with opening the issue.

Sanjay: MichaelR: defining wire level protocols is out-of-scope for this TC. Don't see a problem if we stay within scope.

Sanjay: SimonNash: Not sure if we can avoid breaking the scope rules at this point of time

Sanjay: SimonH: Should we broaden the scope of Mike's new issue to capabilities beyond 'conversations and callback'?

Sanjay: MikeE: haven't identified other capabilities that impact bindings so far 

Sanjay: Eric: Transactions policies may be relevant

Sanjay: ... and we may want the binding specs to talk about exemplary implementations

Sanjay: MikeE/SimonN: concerns about bringing in transactions

Sanjay: SimonH: transactions could be a possible topic for F2F

Sanjay: m: MikeE, s: Bryan, accepted unanimously

Sanjay: topic: 6. Open Issue Discussion

Open issues with proposed resolutions:

http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-18

Clarify the rules on which queues and topics are used for responses and callbacks [Simon Holdsworth]

Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200802/msg00007.html 

Mike Edwards: this is one of the "exemplary implwmentations" I mentioned in the previous issue

anish: oasis ML archives suck

anish: bin00000.bin without a content-type

Mike Edwards: ooh yes

Sanjay: MichaelR: observes that the proposal uses 'MUST' and 'MUST NOT' in many places

Sanjay: ... questions the value of 'MUST' 

Sanjay: SimonNash: benefit may be interoperability between different JMS providers

Sanjay: SimonH: We are essentially defining the callback and conversations protocol for JMS

Sanjay: SimonNash: cautions that we may be going out-of-scope

Sanjay: MichaelR: No protocol for Web services for conversations, etc, is out-of-scope. Not sure if the scoping constrain applies to JMS or not

Sanjay: s/No protocol/Defining protocol

Michael Rowley: The charter is at: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/sca-j/charter.php

Sanjay: Eric: since we are defining properties, we will have to define the context in which they are used

Michael Rowley: It includes the statement: "The TC will not define any wire-level protocols".

Sanjay: SimonH: The proposal enables interoperability between SCA runtimes (and not between existing JMS providers)

Sanjay: MichaelR: We may be able to weasel our way out of the charter restriction by saying - JMS is not about a wire-level protocol

Dave Booz: +1 to MichaelR

Sanjay: SimonNash: We may have to visit the charter rule in the context of WS binding. Don't see an issue with JMS binding.

Sanjay: MikeE: would prefer the proposal to satisfy the requirement of defining 'exemplary implementation' of supporting conversations/callback

Sanjay: MichaelR: ok with taking advantage that the proposal is not about wire-level protocol. But I consider the proposal as not-exemplary but as required.

Sanjay: SimonH: Don't see an alternative to the proposal for supporting conversations/callback in JMS binding

Sanjay: SimonNash: If someone makes a good case of alternative proposal, we could consider rewording the mechanism as one of the mechanisms

Sanjay: SimonNash: If someone makes a good case of alternative proposal, we could consider rewording the mechanism as one of the mechanisms

Sanjay: DaveBooz: does not see the charter boundary issue 

Sanjay: DaveB: can not see Eric's comment to the proposal

Sanjay: SimonH: it was a private discussion which did not impact the proposal

Sanjay: m: SimonH, s: DaveB - to adopt Simon's proposal to resolve issue 18.

Sanjay: m: SimonH, s: DaveB - to adopt Simon's proposal to resolve issue 18.

Sanjay: motion passed unanimously. Issue 18 resolved.

Simon Nash: SimonN was the proposer

Sanjay: topic: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-19

Web Service binding should allow #wsdl.binding with reference targets [Simon Nash] Proposal in issue

Simon Holdsworth: The description of the #wsdl.binding form of the /binding.ws/@wsdlElement attribute says that the endpoint address URI for the SCA service or reference must be provided via the URI attribute on the binding. For references, this seems inconsistent with the assembly spec, which supports binding URIs, reference targets and wire targets as alternative ways of connecting references to services.

Proposal:

In the Web Service binding spec, lines 53 and 54, replace "...the endpoint address URI for the SCA service or reference must be provided via the URI attribute on the binding" by "the endpoint address URI for the SCA service or reference must be provided via the URI attribute on the binding, or (for reference bindings only) via a reference target URI or wire target URI". 

Sanjay: s/m: SimonH/m: SimonNash

Sanjay: m: SimonNash, s: MikeE - accept the wording to resolve issue 19

anonymous morphed into Nimish Hathalia

Sanjay: MichaelR: envisioned use of reference and wire target URI for sca binding

Sanjay: MichaelR: envisioned use of reference and wire target URI for sca binding

Sanjay: MikeE: Assembly issue 6 provided clarifications regarding use of URI

Sanjay: ... it should be possible to use a reference target to point to a SCA service and still use a non sca-binding 

Sanjay: MikeE: Definition of the target attribute for references and wires in Assembly spec may need a clarification

Sanjay: MikeE: Definition of the target attribute for references and wires in Assembly spec may need a clarification

Sanjay: MichaelR: can we say - the endpoint address implied by the reference/wire target URI

Michael Rowley: the endpoint address URI for the SCA service or reference must be provided via the URI attribute on the binding, or (for reference bindings only) may be provided by the endpoint address implied by a reference target URI or wire target URI". 

Sanjay: Anish: ?? <scribe missed the comment>

Sanjay: SimonH: suggest SimonNash to post revised proposal on the mailing list

Sanjay: topic: AoB

Sanjay: meeting adjourned at 10:01 AM Pacific Time

anish: ... if i'm using reference target URI, I may not be specifying the endpoint target URI anywhere and that should be allowed