OASIS ebXML Collaboration Protocol Profile and Agreement TC
02/15/2002 ebXML CPPA Meeting Minutes
DM: We've a quorum
DM: Info about JC meeting. Submit specs without time
lag. Shorten review cycle to 30 days, Increase the submission
to monthly, Allow TCs to have an errata sheet to go
along with the spec, one more.? Karl agreed, but has
to go through board meeting. Not good as that doesn't
happen frequently. Would happen in next 4-5 months.
OASIS process suggests a 60 day recommended PUBLIC REVIEW.
Not mandatory. Marty corrected that it's a suggested
30-60day public review.
DM: Thinks it's a good idea to go through this 30 day
review. This would mean submission would be June 1st.
Need 3 volunteers as implementors. Dale felt "must use"
would mean more robust use rather than a simple usage.
Sybase, Cyclone & Edifecs were there for version 1.0.
Edifecs used to be Tony. Not any more. JSR could be
one of them. If there aren't 3 companies, no point rushing
to get release of the spec
DF: Does it have to be oasis member company
MS: Gave the correct sentence as "member organization"
BH: Can some one who implemented a super set of CPPA
be part of this?
DM: It's left open. It's just to make sure someone
really used it.
MS: Someone has to implement it as it is. Reading from
BH: It's going to implemented finally into database.
MS: Agreement. If not using XML not really using the
DM: Using in the sense of parsing it and successful
use of it.
DF: Can also be prototypes.
DM: Take our time, finish it and then vote on it.
MS: Standards are about products. If companies are
talking about 2 months, we might as well as go for June.
Arvola has gone through a lot of hurdles.
AC: Not really against this. Would be helpful to get
DF: Feels market may become an issue
DM: Tony on vacation. Dale is going to take ownership
for this week for editing. Sunday is a target time.
If have to add issues, Dale can do that
AC: Day for draft distribution
MS: Question on approval business. Would help companies
to get it by June. Approval is to talk publicly about
using CPPA. Looked at it from an implementation perspective.
DM: Barcelona: XML 2000: May , ebTWG is meeting there.
OASIS, have a joint meeting with all the constituents.
IIC expresses interest, no F2F for registry, MSH has
not talked about it. Do we've a F2F? Can we've a representative
to present about CPPA.
DM: Is there a need to have a F2F
MS & BH: Agree that there may be a need for F2F. May
there be an OASIS ebXML Day.
DM: One thing would be to talk about CC Context idea
BH: OASIS may use that XML Europe to have their next
MS: About negotiation, will separate from context.
BH: Comment about context, both BPSS and CPPA are interested
in context. Suggests them to go to twmg first for resolving
issues and then come back. Need to talk about UMM meta
model before getting to BPSS and CPPA
MS: Regions and TZ. We don't know enough about it.
DM: No clear consensus for F2F. Presentation, willing
MS: Fallback is Dale
BH: He can do it. Overloaded for both ebTWG.
DM: People can chip in their specialities.
HM: Will be there. May be
DM: Hima & Brian . Have to send email to Karl. Important
to publicize our efforts. May have to send an abstract.
BH: Helpful to have a presentation anyway.
DF: Prefers a joint meeting.
DM: If joint meeting proposed for US, Most prefer US.
Will change statement to say, interest for F2F, some
interest for Barcelona. Will post a note to list after
sending message to Karl.
DM: Agenda 3. Procedure for submittal. No motions for
march 1st deadline. General consensus to go through
a 30 day public review period.
MS: Yes. But what constitutes public review?
DM: We announce it. Will ask karl that question? 2
public reviews. Second public review not worthwhile.
First public review period to get more feedback
MS: Need 1st public review period in April.
MS: Who's the public? Does oasis have an idea who this
Action Item: DM: Talk to karl about this.
MS: Is there a public list on which this can be posted.
BH: Oasis has a general distribution list.
AC: ebxml-cppa-comments alias
DM: Ask for wider group ->Karl, like wsdl, xmlp.....,
Lets see what oasis can do for us.
KL: What's the general procedure?
DM: Explained the procedure. TC Approval of spec, 30
60 day public review period, subsequent decision to
submit for oasis approval, one month , July 1st for
90 day oasis review of the spec. Then it's approved.
He's going to find the audience for each of the review
period. Question on who gets to vote?
BH: Oasis specification versus committee specification?
MS: Oasis specification goes out with oasis logo. Stamped
BH: We can approve it.....
MS: Any company interested would use the committee
approved specification, but oasis approved specification
DM: Important to get a third company.
DM: URN Issue. Discussed with Karl. We can use URNs
within our TC name. Arvola has couple of examples. No
DUNS example. Would consider adding DUNS. OASIS has
registered and responsible. No real procedure behind
this. Will work with Karl to get this resolved. URN
Resolution Service. Get regrep involved. We need to
have a poll on URN usage.
BH: Mechanism to suggest that you could go to registry
with URN to resolve into an resource.
DM: How to query and update on URN - hope to have an
appendix or a spec on its own. By itself rather than
delay the main specification.
DM: Anyone think that we should avoid publishing some
URN for duns? Brian agreed. No one disagreed. Will work
with Arvola to put a value in the spec. Statement of
intent for URN.
DM: Synchronous DC. Change to schema. Will be in next
version of specification. Subordination technique to
convey that it's a synchronous interaction. Explicit
syntactic way of indicating synchronous mode. Detailed
reading assignments next meeting.
DM: Friday's meeting. Is it ok with everyone?
MS: Can dale post about voting delegates, any information
about how that process works?