Minutes for twentieth OGSI-WG Teleconference February 10, 2003 @ 16:30 - 18:30 GMT Tim Banks, IBM Karl Czajkowski, ISI Shel Finkelstein, Sun Steve Graham, IBM Dave Snelling, Fujitsu Steve Tuecke, ANL Pete Vanderbilt, NASA 1) Approve minutes of February 5th Teleconference - Skipped 2) Matters Arising from The List 2a) ServiceGroup UniquenessRule: This facility is too important (powerful) to leave too open. Therefore, we should possibly leave something in there, possibly as a guide to others implementing extensions. Rejected: Leave it as it is. Rejected: Define an example (simple and complete) UniquenessRule. Resolved: Add returns new entry or fault. Any uniqueness properties are defined in the semantics of the subtype. The base behavior of the portType is a bag with respect to the ServiceGroup members. No UniquenessRule in ogsi. Review UniquenessRule for v1.1. Fault: AddRefused. 2b) Fault code: Do we want fault code in the faults scheme? Does it need to be part of the base class or a subtype? Vote: Do we add a error code to the GridServiceFault: 2 - for, 3 - against, 1 - abstain. Resolved: Add to the spec as a minOccurs=0. Action: Steve G Add to the spec as a minOccurs=0, (Including explanatory text) next time with the pen. Action make faults: Description minOccurs=0, maxOccurs='unbounded'. 2c) GWSDL vs WSDL 1.1 Review of issues on the list. A major argument against WSDL 1.2 was the impact on tooling. Action: Steve G to answer issues around SOAP 1.2. Action: Steve T to talk to Thomas about the tooling issue in more detail. Action: Steve T to produce a GWSDL Draft. Resolved: The GSR is either a WSDL 1.1 or WSDL 1.2 document depending on the above. MEETING STOPPED AT THIS POINT.... The rest to be carried to the next agenda. 3) Review Faults Section Meta Issue: From Steve T: The biggest comment/issue that I see is that our model of having each fault reflected in a WSDL fault element in the operation declaration won't work for extensible operations such as FindServiceData. Should we go back to having just a single fault in the WSDL operation of type GridServiceFaultType, which is extended as necessary? Questions: a- Multiple errors in an operation? - Dave S would recommend that the "first" error be the primary error & others form part of the extensibility element, which may be a sequence of GridServiceFaults. Not this is not the same thing as the "cause" element. b- Should there be an AuthorizationFalut? c- Can a Grid service throw a more general fault than a published fault, e.g throw SemanticFault, rather than SubscriptionTargetNotFound? d- In the fault of 6.2.2, what does "the value" refer to in the case of a multi-valued SDE? Is it talking about one SDE value or the whole set? Should "the value" be replaced by "one of the values"? - Dave S would recommend that, as above, the "first" error be the primary error, all others coming in the extensibility element. The extensibility element could also indicate which SDE was in error. e- What's the difference between the fault s IncompatibleValueType and IncorrectValue? Is the intent that IncompatibleValueType indicates a syntactic violation while IncorrectValue indicates a semantic one? See Set Service Data f- Should we define an fault meaning "violates service constraints" or perhaps IncorrectValue would suffice. See Set Service Data. g- Needed additional faults (see note from GT3 group below) Yes or No. GridService:findServiceData:, InvalidQuery (semantic), QueryNotSupported (structural) NotificationSource:subscribe: SubscriptionTargetNotFound - (semantic -assuming this means the target service cannot be found, rather than a missing locator) h- What about DeliverNotification in the NotificationSink portType, which is a single sided operation, i.e. it does not produce an output message. Can it raise GridServiceFaults? If no, there are several MUSTs in the text that need to be changed to SHOULDs. i- Are the min/maxOccurs, etc. correct? j- Do we want fault numbers? k- Do we want serial numbers? 4) Consolidated Actions Review Action: ---: Feb 07: ---- --: Discussion of fault architecture (See Section 7.7) Action: ---: Feb 05: Steve G: Draft of GWSDL definitions (See Section 5) Action: 55: Feb 05: Shel F: Provide feedback on timestamp model in OASIS, we plan to punt to v1.1 Action: 35: Feb 06: Steve T: Push Tom M. and Thomas S. to provide XML Schema and WSDL for the specification Action: 17 & 82: --- --: Steve G: Finish the handle resolver protocol discussion (See Section 10) Action: ---: --- --: Steve G: Create non-normative text for the service data section describing forward looking solutions to query processing via XPath/XQuery. (Sections 9.2.1.2/3, 6.2.1, 9.2.3) Action: 93, 94: --- --: Steve T: Check and fix these bugzilla items Action: Steve T: Substitute service data description with service data declaration. Action: Steve T: some types use "ServiceType", and some use "GridServiceType". Make these consistent Action: 19: --- --: Steve T: Check as this bug has been resolved already. May just need to remove highlighting. (Section 12.2.1) Action: ---: --- --: Steve T: Make sure that the WSDL group is aware of the OGSI's use of the WSDL 1.2 draft. Use the gwsdl draft to package notification. Action: 42: --- --: ----- -: Andrea & Steve T & Dave: Complete the faults for all operations in all portTypes (Action on Feb 5). Action: 67: --- --: ----- -: Check that draft schema support optional parameters, e.g. empty extensibility, See Section 9, and resolved bug 67. Options: Define a element that can go into a ##any, or use substitution group, or use XSD nillable 5) Next Meeting: Tuesday, Feb 11, 2003 (Note 2 hours). 08:30-10:30 US Pacific 09:30-11:30 US Mountain 10:30-12:30 US Central 11:30-13:30 US Eastern 15:30-17:30 GMT 16:30-18:30 UK 17:30-19:30 Central Europe 00:30-02:30 Japan Place (Note place may change) Steve T to check: 484-630-8733 passcode 89914 6) Open Bugzilla list: Notification Bugs: Bug 61 - Provide notification of destuction in the GSS Bug ?? - Deliver with ack issue?? Bug ?? - Review Notification status and language (was an agenda item). WSDL Bugs: Bug 62 - Do we need a way to mark operations in a portType optional? Factory Bugs: Bug 72 - mutability of gsdl:CreatesPortTypes and CreationInputTypes Bug 73 - Factory::CreateService requester as SDE? Bug 74 - strictness of gsdl:CreatesPortTypes commentary Misc Bugs: Bug 70 - Change SDE names from "...Types" to "...Elements" Bug 39 - message identifier for audit Bug 77 - serviceDataNames minOccurs should be 7 Bug 30 - Define queryByXPath Bug 31 - Define queryByXQuery Bug 44 - Language linking notification subscriptions to SDEs. Bug 71 - CPU port-type example SDE inconsistent Bug 81 - GSS and WS-SD need unification.