Minutes from 2008-02-07 call

SCA-BPEL Weekly meeting has been modified by Mr.
Sanjay Patil

 

Date:  Thursday, 07 February 2008

Time:  08:00am - 09:00am PT

 

SUMMARY:

Opened Issue 18

 

Resolved Issue 2: Does the spec allow a
componentType side file

Accepted text:

A BPEL process (which is
identified by a QName) can be matched with any ComponentType document that has
an <implementation.bpel> that refers to the same process QName, wherever
it might be within the contribution. For example, if a componentType document
has an <implementation.bpel process="foo:bar">, it will be
considered a match for a BPEL process identified by "foo:bar" QName
(where the prefix "foo" in both documents are resolved to the same
namespace).  While
the assembly specification allows <implementation.bpel> to be absent, for
SCA BPEL, the component type MUST include an <implementation.bpel>
element.  There
MUST be only one ComponentType file corresponding to a BPEL QName within a
contribution.

 

DETAILS:

 

Agenda:

1. Roll Call

   http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-bpel/members/roster.php

 

2. Appointment of scribe: Michael
 Rowley

 

3. Agenda bashing

- Moved issue 1 earlier

 

4. Approval of Jan 31, 2008 meeting minutes

   http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00042.html

 

Approved without objection.

 

5. Action items review

   http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-bpel/members/action_items.php

   

   #0021 chairs to follow up with Mary to post the
CD docs to OASIS repository

Not done

 

   #0022 chairs to confirm the May f2f date with
Jane

Confirmed as May 1 & 2 (Thur & Fri)

 

   #0023 Khanderao: file a new issue for re-writing
specs with RFC-2119

Done.

 

   #0024 Martin: to write up a proposal for issue 15
(Define Conformance Targets)

Not Done.

 

6. New Issues

 

New issue: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00048.html

Anish moves, Ashok seconds,
to open issue 18: Need to rewrite the SCA-BPEL specifications with RFC-2119
keywords/statements

No objections.

 

7. Issue Discussion

 

Issue 1 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BPEL-1

Deferred

 

Issue 2 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BPEL-2

TITLE: Does the spec allow a componentType side file

SUBMITTED BY: Anish Karmarkar

 

Michael Rowley: Rowley recalls that Mike E
didn't agree with ability to override information from the component type side
file.

Michael Rowley: Anish recalls that Mike E
also objected to having bpel-specific information in the component type

anish:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00006.html

anish:
another email from MikeR: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bpel/200801/msg00031.html

Sanjay:
In section 2, line 194 add --

It is also possible to have
a component type file that is associated 

with the BPEL component
implementation. When such a component type file 

is present, as specified in
[SCA-Assembly], it provides component type 

information in addition to
what is found by introspection.

Michael Rowley: SCA finds the ComponentType

For a BPEL process named
"foo:bar" by finding any ComponentType document

that has
<implementation.bpel qname="foo:bar">, wherever it might be

within the contribution.

Sanjay:
Related assembly issue: http://osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-36

Michael Rowley: We should concentrate on
how to find the component type side file for a process, since assembly-36 will
handle what can be in it.

Michael Rowley: Unanimous agreement.

Michael Rowley: Anish believes that
runtimes will not guarantee that there is only one component type file for a
process, even if we require it with a "MUST".

Michael Rowley: ... also noted that this
problem is true for everywhere SCA resolves QNames.

Michael Rowley: ... Isn't worried about
having BPEL specific information in that side file.

Michael Rowley: ... Suggests allowing them
to be anywhere, but perhaps we can also have a means of pointing to one
explicitly.

Michael Rowley: ... But there again, that
could be done for all QName resolution.

Sanjay:
Related assembly issue for artifact resolution: http://osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-8

Michael Rowley: ... On a previous call,
there was a suggestion that there may be a default location (same URI but with
.componentType extension) and that the component type that is there doesn't
have to have <implementation.bpel>

Michael Rowley: ... Anish is suggesting
that we could maintain the requirement that it always have implementation.bpel?

Michael Rowley: Sanjay - what would be the
value of the uri in that case?

Michael Rowley: Anish - even if it is in
the default location, you still need the implementation.bpel with the right
QName.

ichael
Rowley: SCA finds the ComponentType
for a BPEL process named "foo:bar" by finding any ComponentType
document that has <implementation.bpel process="foo:bar">,
wherever it might be within the contribution.  While the assembly specification
allows <implementation.bpel> to be absent, for SCA BPEL, the component
type MUST include an <implementation.bpel> element.

Michael Rowley: Suggested amendment:

Michael Rowley: If
<implementation.bpel> is not present, then the component type has to have
a contribution URI that is identical to the contribution URI except that the
extension has to be changed to ".componentType".

anish:
here is what I would prefer: 1) A componentType document for a BPEL process
definition can be found by using either "process QName matching" or
"contribution URI matching" mechanisms.

 

If a componentType document
cannot be found through either "process QName matching" or
"contribution URI matching" mechanism, SCA infrastructure MUST
implicitly generate a componentType document based on the introspection of the
implementation BPEL process definition.

 

For "process QName
matching", a BPEL process (which is identified by a QName) can be matched
with any ComponentType document that has an <implementation.bpel> refers
to the same process QName, wherever it might be within the contribution. For
example, if a componentType document has an <implementation.bpel
process="foo:bar">, it will be considered a match for a BPEL
process identified by "foo:bar" QName (where the prefix
"foo" in both documents are resolved to the same namespace.).

 

For "contribution URI
matching", a BPEL process can be matched with a componentType document of
which the contribution URI is identical to the contribution URI of the BPEL
process except of that the extension is changed to ".componentType".
For example, if "file:/scratch/dir1/compositeX/Foo.bpel" is the
contribution URI of a BPEL process, then the contribution URI of a matching
componentType document would be:
"file:/scratch/dir1/compositeX/Foo.componentType"

 

If a non-one-to-one
relationship is found during matching (e.g. one-to-many or many-to-one), SCA
Infrastructure SHOULD signal an error to users. 

anish:
here is what I would prefer 1) CA finds the ComponentType for a BPEL process
named "foo:bar" by finding any ComponentType document that has
<implementation.bpel process="foo:bar">, wherever it might be
within the contribution.  While the assembly specification allows
<implementation.bpel> to be absent, for SCA BPEL, the component type MUST
include an <implementation.bpel> element.

anish:
2) there MUST be only one CT file corresponding to a BPEL QName within a
contribution

Michael Rowley: A BPEL process (which is
identified by a QName) can be matched with any ComponentType document that has
an <implementation.bpel> refers to the same process QName, wherever it
might be within the contribution. For example, if a componentType document has
an <implementation.bpel process="foo:bar">, it will be
considered a match for a BPEL process identified by "foo:bar" QName
(where the prefix "foo" in both documents are resolved to the same
namespace.).

Michael Rowley: While the assembly
specification allows <implementation.bpel> to be absent, for SCA BPEL,
the component type MUST include an <implementation.bpel> element.

Michael Rowley: there MUST be only one CT
file corresponding to a BPEL QName within a contribution

Michael Rowley: Rowley moves that the
previous three entries be used to resolve issue 2.

Michael Rowley: Charlton seconds.

Michael Rowley: No objections -- issue 2 is
resolved.

Michael Rowley: Meeting adjourned.

 

-----------------------------------------

Rotating scribe list:

* Genov, Mr. Genadi; SAP AG

* Guizar, Alejandro; Red Hat

* Kinner, Mr. Jason; Oracle Corporation

* Levinson, Rich; Oracle Corporation

* Little, Dr. Mark; Red Hat

* Mischkinsky, Jeff; Oracle Corporation

* Andrabi, Mr. Najeeb; TIBCO Software Inc. (10/4/07)

* Barreto, Dr. Charlton; Adobe Systems (10/11/07)

* Pellegrini, Mr Michael; Active Endpoints, Inc.
(10/18/07)

* Durand, Mr Jacques; Fujitsu Limited (11/1/07)

* Ford, Mr Mark; Active Endpoints, Inc. (11/8/07)

* Moser, Mr Simon; IBM (11/15/07) 

* Malhotra, Mr Ashok; Oracle Corporation (11/29/07)

* van der Rijn, Danny; TIBCO
Software Inc. (12/06/07)

* Trickovic, Mrs Ivana; SAP AG (1/27/08)

* Chapman, Dr Martin; Oracle Corporation (9/7/07,
12/13/07)

* Koenig, Mr Dieter; IBM (10/25/07, 1/10/08)

* Kand, Khanderao; Oracle Corporation (9/20/07,
1/31/08)

* Rowley, Mr Michael; BEA Systems, Inc. (9/27/07, 2/7/08)