Minutes of the Fifth OGSI-WG Teleconference
11/Sep/2002 @ 15:00-16:30 GMT

Attendees:

Tim Banks <IBM>
Karl Czajkowski <ISI>
Shel Finkelstein <Sun>
Fred Maciel <Hitachi>
Y. Masuoka <Hitachi>
Andreas Savva <Fujitsu>
Frank Siebenlist <ANL>
David Snelling <Fujitsu>
Peter Vanderbilt <NASA>

1) We discussed and reviewed the minutes of the Interim Meeting at
   ANL. The following issues were raised and discussed briefly,
   however, no changes to the minutes were required.

- The GGF time table was confirmed, stressing the point that within
  the Working Group we expect to have total agreement and a draft spec
  by December 15, 2002 so that the spec can go for Public comment to
  the whole of GGF at that time.

     Oct_01_2002 (XML schemas, most current decisions, some cleaning on text)
     Oct_13_2002 (Working document for the WG sessions with tracked changes)
     Nov_12_2002 (All open issues resolved)
     Dec_15_2002 (Ready for insertion into the GGF process, with the
                  possibility of doing a v1.1) 


- Tim Banks asked how the name clashes issues was to be resolved serviceType inheritance. The answer is: a) it is a 
issue with serviceType without inheritance and therefore W3C may address it in some way and we will follow this strategy
; b) it is actually a tooling issue, since name clashes for operations are avoided at the WSDL level by the namespace, 
but the the tooled proxy might have a problem resolving this, c) inheritance of two copies of the same portType should 
result in the inclusion of only one copy.

- Frank Siebenlist asked about the resolution on service instance identity. It was recommended that since it was 
resolved at this level, a discussion be opened on the mailing list to see if it warrants a second pass.

- Tim Banks asked about the justification for strict immutability and
  the lack of some versioning information. The answer was that the
  variety of ways in which a service could evolve was much more
  complex than could be captured in a simple set of rules. Andrew
  Grimshaw referenced a thesis that outlined this issue. There are
  also major problems propagating change information, as the GSS has
  no mechanism of global publication of deprecated functions other
  than those contained in the spec itself.

Action: A. Grimshaw to see if the dissertation referred to can be
pushed to the whole mailing list.

2) Technical Discussion of Notification

There were three issues raised by D. Snelling for general discussion,
the aim being to clarify issues, but with both Steve Graham and Steve
Tuecke absent, no effort was made to resolve these.

- The distinction between 'void return' and 'no return' in some
  operations

The DeliverNotification, RegisterService, and possibly the Destroy
operations all seen to have semantics that imply that nothing comes
back from the service instance, neither in the form of a return
response nor the presence / absence of a failure. It was generally
agreed (also noted in the minutes of the Interim Meeting) that QoS
issues such as transaction semantics or reliable delivery were binding
level properties. Yet it was still felt important that some form of
exception framework be considered for inclusion in the spec.

- The specialization of the DeliverNotification operation

The DeliverNotification operation in the the NotificationSink portType
and any "specialization" of it as a return from Subscribe raised
concerns. 1) The concept of "specialization" as described needs
clarification. A key issue was whether the signature of the
specialization was the same as DeliverNotification or not. If yes, the
concept of "specialization" was counter to the notion of refinement or
subtyping. If no, it implies dynamic runtime tooling of implementation
proxies and access to the WSDL describing the operation. Either way
problems exist for further discussion.

- Language linking notification subscriptions to SDEs.

The spec stresses in...