INFOD Closed Actions ==================== 1 Add reference to appropriate appendix, or description for vocabulary, identity management, etc. in Page 5, para 2: we need references or brief explanation of vocabulary, identity management and principal as they all have a meaning which is peculiar to their context. This is now in the specification - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter - target date: 31 Jul 2005 - Closed 8 Sep 2005 2 Add Arjun to list of writers of specs... - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile - Closed 1 Sep 2005 3 After much discussion about using WSDM to stop/start our services, we decide that we agree that starting/stopping our service is out of scope. - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Closed 1 Sep 2005 4 Figure 1 is confusing. Steve to come up with better diagram. http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2005/05/msg00003.html - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Steve - Closed 1 Sep 2005 5 Go over list of questions, clarifications addressed for chapter 1 in http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2005/05/msg00001.html (ch 2 questions have an open item for them) Page 4, para 4: "a publication specifies..." the first part is fine but then you say it "makes available". I don't think a publication should *do* anything. CONSIDERED TO BE NO LONGER RELEVANT - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Closed: 20 Oct 2005 6 Go over list of questions, clarifications addressed for chapter 2 in http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2005/05/msg00001.html (ch 1 questions have an open item for them) CONSIDERED TO BE NO LONGER RELEVANT - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Target 4 Aug 2005 - Closed: 20 Oct 2005 7 Go over list of questions, issues raised in May 05 F2F: http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2005/06/msg00001.html - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Chris - Target date: 21 Jul 2005 8 Map the original infod registry object components back to operation parms newly defined to ensure no loss of function from Chicago June 05 F2f discussion Now in specification - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter, Cecile - target date: 31 Jul 2005 - Closed 8 Sep 2005 9 Update SensorNet scenario with operations as per Chicago F2F June 05 Include scenario to determine when consumer, consumption needed and decide whether definition of equivalent of association for consumption is needed DONE - it will be reviewed further as part of action 58 - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Arjun - Target date: 15 Nov 2005 - Closed 10 Nov 2005 11 Write homeland security use-case Are we still doing this ?! It was decided that this was no longer useful and was covered by the SensorNet Use Case - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Abdeslem - Closed 14 Jul 2005 12 Consider bank balance notification use case It was decided to add a short note in the use case document mentioning the desitability of such a Use Case - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 13 Consider e-mail filter use case Sounds like a POBox application It was decided to add a short note in the use case document mentioning the desitability of such a Use Case - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile, Shailendra - Target date: 15 Sep 2005 - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 14 Write ERP use case Are we still doing this ?! It was decided that this was no longer useful - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Target date: - Closed 14 Jul 2005 16 Connect with Medical Screening Use Case: Here is the reference: One researcher doing 'classification technology' is Ed Chang, he calls the technology PBIR (Perception-based Image Retrieval). There are other widely used technologies such as 'Recommendation Engines' known from Business Intelligence. http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/09/msg00002.html Are we still doing this ? We decided not to - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: - target date: - Closed 14 Jul 2005 15 Create new SensorNet scenario to determine when consumer, consumption needed and decide whether definition of equivalent of association for consumption is needed This will be incoporated into action 9 - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owners: Dieter, Arjun - Target date: ?? - Closed 14 Jul 2005 17 Include Bank and Sensor scenario to do from infod Mailing list http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/07/msg00001.html Are we still doing this ? It was decided not to do this. So the action is DROPPED - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Steve F - target date: - Closed 4 Aug 2005 18 Incorporate Chicago 05 F2F updates This is coverered by actions 5 and 6 - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile - Target date: end of 31 Jul 2005 - Closed 14 Jul 2005 19 John Davey's suggestion. June 05. Cecile to simplify specs as per suggestions. This is coverered by actions 5 and 6 - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile - Target date: end of Jul - Closed 14 Jul 2005 20 Ensure that existing glossary includes the following terms, and that they are defined in specs. - From http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2005/01/msg00006.html - Terms for INFOD to clarify, define: - Publisher, Consumer, Subscriber, Broker , Propagator (INFOD has no producer) - Continuous query Pushing, Polling and Pull Action Event correlation of content and creation Type System Language Registry History and latest queries Mediation Primary and Secondary producers Topics Profiles Demand Driven Publishing Targeted Publishing Definition On Demand Publishing Definition On Demand Propagation Definition - vocabulary, identity, The event taxonomoy should be explained in the glossary - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Vijay - target date: 10 Sep 2005 - Closed: 20 Oct 2005 23 Provide response to document proposed by Vijay on infod suggested service modifications: - publication regenerate - some services can regenerate some cannot and need to cache - aspects of analyst role - lifetime management - and new point - Clarification: A publication can be viewed as a reaction to a query however the format of the published material may need to be considered or specified separately See https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/infod-wg/document/Info-D_Suggested_Service_Modifications/ for Vijay paper and see http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/07/msg00001.html for issue description NO LONGER RELEVANT - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile - Target date: 15 Sep 2005 - Closed: 20 Oct 2005 24 Document in specs summary of issues raised in Vijay's original append - and resolutions - and validate still accurate with existing infod specs: - declarative vs descriptive interfaces - type of data/temporal/meta events defined in infod - consumption See http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/08/msg00004.html and summarize resolutions as per: http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/08/msg00005.html http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/08/msg00006.html http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/08/msg00007.html Is this still relevant. Cecile will ask Vijay to read it. Reading has been done. This is now addressed in the spec. - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile, Vijay - Target date: 3 Nov 2005 - Closed 17 Nov 2005 25 Define relationship between Infod AND DAIS - document current positioning - resolve lifetime issues of INFOD objects vs DAIS sessions - 3rd party delivery support - This should probably go into a use case This will be addressed by the use case required by action 59 on 3rd party delivery. - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owners: Susan - target date: 31 Aug 2005 - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 26 We will need to update spec to use WS-RF resource properties and operators. But our query semantics might be different than those of WSRF; so we'll have to be careful about how we structure the registry to allow it. Topics about Resource Management (naming, versioning and change management of resources) is not part of the INFOD scope yet some specific components are expected by the INFOD model, in particular: time of a change, a reference to an identity to record responsibility for the change, time when a version becomes valid, time when a version expires, a schedule when this version is valid, etc. Document current positioning wrt to wsrf (a few papers were summarizing this already) it might mean that we end up trying to build on top of or align with WS-BaseNotification, because it is part of the OGSA Basic Profile Document current positioning wrt to wsn (ref: http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2005/05/msg00003.html) WS-ResourceLifetime is a specification that allows us to destroy resources. Does this have any sort of versioning? Not obviously - this could be used for planned updates? There is no scheduling component to this specification - it is about handling instances, not any evolutionary aspects of a service. We will still have to have our own creation mechanisms. Now just needs writing up However we now think that WSRF should be optional - but still needs writing up. Needs comments on section 3 Remove section 3.9 and don't expose yet as WS resources - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owners: Abdeslem, Cecile - Target date: 27 Oct 2005 - Closed: 10 Nov 2005 27 Understand action 17! In his absence it was decided to transfer 17 to Steve F! - Date: 14 Jul 2005 - Owners: Steve F - Target date: 21 Jul 2005 - Closed 21 Jul 2005 30 Add pattern of many publishers publishing using the same PublicationType via association We may just explain this in the spec. This is now in the spec: action COMPLETE - Date: 21 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile - Target date: - Closed: 4 Aug 2005 32 Define non-events - are they deadline related? Dieter has produced the following text. It does not appear to fit into any of our current documents: INFOD uses the terms states, events, and messages. Messages report about events; events are the consequence of state changes. State changes require a temporal data model; i.e., the ability to compare a state with previous states. By definition an event has happened when an expression or constraint becomes true after a state transition. This model represents an extension of the normalization model of temporal databases. Temporal database technology also looks at the duration of an expression remaining true in the presence of state changes. If the length for a condition to remain true should be limited, one expects two state changes (events), one when entering a state where the condition becomes true and one entering a state where the condition is not true anymore. If the second state change (event) does not happen within a given time limit, it is important to create awareness of this fact by creating an alternative events. The alternative event is often perceived as a non-event; it got created because the expected event did not happen in time; or using another view: a deadline has been missed. - Date: 21 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile and Dieter - Target date: 20 Oct 2005 - Closed 20 Oct 2005 33 Review what's in the specification on vocabularies and give feedback Which version - when should this be done? Now - Date: 21 Jul 2005 - Owner: Steve F - Target date:11 Aug 2005 - Closed 8 Sep 2005 34 Review what's in the specification about disseminators and give feedback. See issues 13 and 17 Which version - when should this be done? Not yet. This is no longer considered a useful action - Date: 21 Jul 2005 - Owner: Abdeslem and Susan - Target date: - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 35 Break the spec into multiple logical documents defining different levels of INFOD. OGSA profiles mandate base WSN. To be compliant we need to refactor around base notifications now and provide INFOD services as an extension to WS-BaseNotify?    http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/08/msg00010.html http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2004/12/msg00000.html Questions to address include: How does WS-Eventing fit in? What's the difference between a disseminator and a WSN broker? publication and WSN topic? Vocabulary and WSN filter? Can WSN send message directly to a consumer by name? Publications are defined by topics in WSN, how does that differ from INFOD mechanisms for controlling publications through vocabularies? One proposal was to split: o Information Dissemination from publishers to consumers, allowing subscribers to subscribe on behalf of 3rd party consumers o Information Dissemination with one or more disseminators, but without propagation requirements between disseminators (disseminators do not talk to each other yet provide decoupling of publishers/subscribers/consumers interaction) o Information Dissemination with one or more disseminators and with possible propagation between disseminators (delivery of the "intelligent cloud" Another proposal from F2F was to look at the list of Requirements, and pick a few that are doable short term, and use it to drive the factoring from simple to more complex scenarios - and use that work to see how the 2 relate to each other (ie common short term items from both) Amount of information points to two documents (not three as initially thought). First document with base functionality. Rest in second document. Moving GetMData description to base document. - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Cecile, Susan, Abdeslem - Target date: post GGF15 - Closed: 20 Oct 2005 37 See how to divide Reg Manager interface into 2 documents. Do we need WSDL Inheritance? It was decided to avoid the latest WSDL. "Copy and paste" inheritance can be done as a profile. - Date: 25 Aug 2005 - Owner: Steven - Target date: - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 38 Consider issue 2 Covered by action 46 - Date 8 Sep 2005 - Owner: ALL - Target: 22 Sep 2005 - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 39 Consider issue 7 Covered by action 52 - Date 8 Sep 2005 - Owner: ALL - Target: 29 Sep 2005 - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 40 Discusss with Dieter the vocabulary issuse of 20 and 21 and 28 - Date 8 Sep 2005 - Owner: Vijay - Target: 10 Nov 2005 - Closed 17 Nov 2005 41 Fix section 2 of the specification and make it consistent with section 3.8.1 - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Target: 10 Nov 2005 - Closed 17 Nov 2005 42 Remove body from the the message header section and add comments for every attribute - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Shailendra, Cecile - Target: 20 Oct 2005 - Closed 17 Nov 2005 44 Put mandatory properties together in the message structure - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Shailendra, Cecile - Target: 20 Oct 2005 - Closed 17 Nov 2005 45 Describe the behavior of DestinationEPRs and MessageIds in an INFOD system The following should be incorporated by Cecile into the spec which is currently locked: MessageIds are universaly unique ids and are created at the time of publish. Messages can be correlated using the correlation id. The uniqueness of MessageIds is very useful in P2P protocols and message recovery after instance failure. - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Shailendra, Cecile - Target: 20 Oct 2005 - Closed 8 Dec 2005 47 Give feedback on Shailendra and Vijay's work. This is no longer considered useful - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Arjun - Target: 31 Oct 2005 - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 51 Add a subscriber id to the create subscription interface - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Target: 10 Nov 2005 - Closed: 8 Dec 2005 54 Revise and place Use Case template on GGF WebSite - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Steve F - Target: 10 Oct 2005 - Closed: 13 Oct 2005 57 Create/revise use case in accordance with new template: Cars - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Target: 15 Nov 2005 - Closed: 3 Nov 2005