[OMod] minutes of Oct 21th 2003 call

Title: [OMod] call this week moved to Fri, Oct 17th, 3-4pm EST


Roll: Igor, BrianC, 
DanF, William, Zulah, Heather, Alexandro, Fred, 
Andrea

 

Approval of minutes http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00075.html

approved

 

Agenda

 

ISSUE 
1: identifying one atomic manageability capability which we can 
model with props/ops/events/metadata, can we just stick to slide 
17?

In 
other words: do we lump all operations/props/events into one UML piece (class) 
or do we split classes as indicated on slide 17.

 

[long discussion not 
recorded]

DECISION: we will start defining a UML model 
componentized according to categories (concerns, capabilities) expressed on the 
slide 17 subbulets of the first bullet.

Igor: will send empty UML model with those 
components

 

ISSUE 2: 
manageability of a web service: inferred from manageable 
endpoints or do we need to 
define manageable service separately

The former means that an endpoint's 
manageability information is sufficient to infer manageability of a service. The 
manager can do it and may represent the manageable service which we may define 
later, but not now. The later means that we define manageable service as a 
separate concept and associate manageability capabilities and information with 
it and not with an endpoint.

 

[long discussion on the culprits of the web 
service concepts, not recorded]

DECISION: we will not define separate model for 
a manageable service

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

William's concern about manageability 
information to capture relationship of endpoints and services separately from 
WSDL/UDDI, etc. was postponed until we get to discuss the actual manageability 
model with concete properties, etc. William will propose and justify concrete 
elements of the model at that point.

 

 

ISSUE 
3: aggregation of manageability to the endpoint level is a 
responsibility of the provider of manageability (need text for the concepts 
section)

This is clear, 
but needs an action item on someone to provide the 
text.

 

BrianC's input: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00080.html

Igor's answer: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00081.html

 

ACTION: Fred to provide text for the ISSUE 
3.

 

ISSUE 4 (by BrianC): concepts of 
versioning have to be applied to the MOWS Concepts diagram

Igor: 
yes, but may be as details of the concepts diagram: pick elements that are 
necessary to express the versioning/revision concepts and draw a diagram 
complimentary to the main diagram

ACTION: BrianC to provide a versioning concepts diagram 

 

BrianC's input http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/msg00080.html

 

BrianC 
presented the UML diagram on the page 3 of the http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200310/doc00006.doc

- revisions are 
infromation about the an element

- change 
descriptions are information about transitions between 
revisions

[Andrea's 
comments?? sorry, didn't capture them]

BrianC: question 
to the group: should revision concepts be part of the main diagram or a detail 
diagram that compliments the main diagram?

Andrea, DanF, 
Igor: complimentary detail diagram

DanF&Igor had 
a concern that version has to be expressed as well. For example a versioned 
service "is a" service with version as an attribution. Revisions are written 
against versioned elements (associated to). This applies to all other elements 
that can be versioned.

BrianC 
agreed.

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

 

CALL 
CLOSED

 

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.

 

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

 

NOT DISCUSSED

 

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

 

NOT DISCUSSED

 

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

 

NOT 
DISCUSSED

-- Igor 
Sedukhin .. () 
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, 
Islandia, NY 11788