Meeting Minutes for OASIS SDD

Document Sample
Meeting Minutes for OASIS SDD Powered By Docstoc
					Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 10/23/2008 Meeting
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from Ocober 9 (no meeting October
16).

2. Administrative

3. v1.0 status
- Updated examples approved (Brent sent request to OASIS Staff to re-
publish)
- Need to consider errata to update pointers in specification to schema
files (Randy has produced new RDDL namespace documents)

4. v1.1 updates

ACTIVE PROPOSALS (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as
time permits). See spreadsheet "v1.1 Candidate Items" for details

** Expected this week:
- N9/N10: Version representation/Revisit use of Profiles (Jason): Jason
will update the proposal previously discussed. [Jason cannot join
today; cover this next week]
- N12: Additional Variable Types (Lazar/Chris): updated proposal
posted; to discuss today

** In process or tabled (to resume discussion later):
- D2 Self-Documenting Schema (Howard): proposal direction was approved;
seeking volunteers to develop final proposal
- S3 Interoperability (Julia): Tabled until Julia returns; may want to
split this into separate items addressing various aspects of
interoperability

COMPLETED PROPOSALS (for reference):
- S0 Charter update (Brent): Complete/published
- N18 Use OASIS Standard for name/address (Howard): Initial
outline/sketch to determine direction was presented; TC consensus is
not to pursue further.
- N14 Updated/Final Pattern proposal (Randy): approved;
specification/schema updates pending
- N1a Root Install (Randy & Jason): papproved; specification/schema
updates pending

C. Discussion

5. Old/new business
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OVF Working Group
(target end October)
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OASIS SCA-Assembly
TC (request sent to SCA-Assembly co-chairs 08/21; no reply; sent
reminder 09/24; no reply yet)

** Adjourn 12:00 Noon US Eastern time
MINUTES
(Julia on leave of absence; Brent recorded minutes).

We have a quorum.

1. Minutes from October 9 approved without objection (no meeting October 16).
2. Administrative:
       a. [none]
3. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda
       a. Brent has asked OASIS staff what is required to publish our updated
           examples (with correct URLs) that were approved last week.
       b. Randy has updated and posted the namespace/RDDL documents to correctly
           reference the URL where the schema is published. We will pursue an erratum
           for the specification (Brent will generate) to point to the updated
           namespace/RDDL documents (rather than directly pointing to schema URLs
           as is now done in the specification). This will make any future updates easier
           (only RDDL docs would need to be updated, not the spec).
4. v1.1 items:
       a. N9/N10 (Profile revisit): No update this week; will return to this item next
           week.
       b. N12 (Additional variable types): Lazar posted updated slides and we reviewed
           the changes and agreed that the changes sufficiently addressed input from
           previous review. Motion by Chris for approval; second by Merri; approved
           unanimously.

5. Old/new business
      a. Everyone, please look at documents owned by you in “Working
         Documents” category. To assist with document management, some
         inactive documents can be moved to “Reference” or “Archive” category,
         but this must be performed by the document owner. ** PLEASE DO NOT
         DELETE ANY DOCUMENT **. If you have questions about what to do with
         old documents, contact Brent.
      b. Joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter notes that they will
         consider leveraging SDD): Brent has contacted the SCA-Assembly TC co-chairs
         requesting a meeting with that TC to review/provide education on SDD. No
         response to that request yet. Brent followed up with another query on 09/24;
         no response to that yet, either.
      c. Future F2F meeting: Prior consensus that we should tentatively plan a F2F
         meeting for early 2009 (perhaps late January/early February). Please
         consider having your company host the next F2F meeting and let us
         know if you can do so, and in what location. We will discuss next week and
         open a ballot to determine specific dates.

Adjourned 11:15 US eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 10/09/2008 Meeting
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from Ocober 2

2. Administrative
- F2F meeting discussion. Any candidate hosts? Any candidate time
frames? Open ballot to determine specific dates?

3. v1.0 status
- Updated examples approved (Brent sent request to OASIS Staff to re-
publish)
- Need to consider errata to update pointers in specification to schema
files (Randy has produced new RDDL namespace documents)

4. v1.1 updates

ACTIVE PROPOSALS (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as
time permits). See spreadsheet "v1.1 Candidate Items" for details

** Expected this week:
- N9/N10: Version representation/Revisit use of Profiles (Jason): Jason
will update the proposal previously discussed.
- N12: Additional Variable Types (Lazar/Chris): initial proposal
posted; to discuss today

** In process or tabled (to resume discussion later):
- D2 Self-Documenting Schema (Howard): proposal direction was approved;
seeking volunteers to develop final proposal
- S3 Interoperability (Julia): Tabled until Julia returns; may want to
split this into separate items addressing various aspects of
interoperability

COMPLETED PROPOSALS (for reference):
- S0 Charter update (Brent): Complete/published
- N18 Use OASIS Standard for name/address (Howard): Initial
outline/sketch to determine direction was presented; TC consensus is
not to pursue further.
- N14 Updated/Final Pattern proposal (Randy): approved;
specification/schema updates pending
- N1a Root Install (Randy & Jason): papproved; specification/schema
updates pending

C. Discussion

5. Old/new business
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OVF Working Group
(target end October)
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OASIS SCA-Assembly
TC (request sent to SCA-Assembly co-chairs 08/21; no reply; sent
reminder 09/24; no reply yet)

** Adjourn 12:00 Noon US Eastern time
MINUTES
(Julia on leave of absence; Brent recorded minutes).

We have a quorum.

6. Minutes from October 2 approved without objection.
7. Administrative:
       a. Brief discussion of F2F meeting. Based on economic climate and likelihood
           that many participants will not be able to travel, we tabled further discussion
           of a F2F meeting indefinitely, until such time as it become more realistic to
           have one. However, in the meantime, Jason suggests that we schedule some
           more in-depth time to discuss larger issues. Will investigate video
           conferences or other media/venues to hold such meetings. Brent to identify
           candidate topics and see about scheduling a trial (multi-hour) session in lieu
           of F2F meeting.
8. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda
       a. Brent has asked OASIS staff what is required to publish our updated
           examples (with correct URLs) that were approved last week.
       b. Randy has updated and posted the namespace/RDDL documents to correctly
           reference the URL where the schema is published. We will pursue an erratum
           for the specification (Brent will generate) to point to the updated
           namespace/RDDL documents (rather than directly pointing to schema URLs
           as is now done in the specification). This will make any future updates easier
           (only RDDL docs would need to be updated, not the spec).
9. v1.1 items:
       a. N9/N10 (Profile revisit): No update this week; will return to this item next
           week.
       b. N12 (Additional variable types): Lazar posted slides and we reviewed these.
           Several suggestions for tweaks to the current proposal. Lazar will make these
           updates and bring back next week. TC consensus is that direction is
           appropriate and useful; we expect to vote on this next week once minor
           changes are made.

10. Old/new business
       a. Randy asks about posting new schema with changes for adopted proposals.
          Randy will rename files to indicate that these are v1.1 schema files and post
          in Working Documents. We will also need to update file names in the
          “Standards” category to distinguish various versions as we approach a v1.1
          “release”. Everyone, please look at documents owned by you in “Working
          Documents” category. Some can be deleted; some can be moved to
          “Reference” or “Archive” category. We would like to clean up the
          documents page. If you have questions about what to do with old
          documents, contact Brent.
       b. Joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter notes that they will
          consider leveraging SDD): Brent has contacted the SCA-Assembly TC co-chairs
          requesting a meeting with that TC to review/provide education on SDD. No
          response to that request yet. Brent followed up with another query on 09/24;
          no response to that yet, either.
       c. Future F2F meeting: Prior consensus that we should tentatively plan a F2F
          meeting for early 2009 (perhaps late January/early February). Please
          consider having your company host the next F2F meeting and let us
          know if you can do so, and in what location. We will discuss next week and
          open a ballot to determine specific dates.

Adjourned 11:50 US eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 10/02/2008 Meeting
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from September 18 (no meeting
September 25)

2. Administrative

3. v1.0 status
- OASIS Standard 1.0 Complete, updated schemas posted
- Updated examples approved (Brent sent request to OASIS Staff to re-
publish)
- Need to consider errata to update pointers in specification to schema
files (Randy has produced new RDDL namespace documents)

4. v1.1 updates

ACTIVE PROPOSALS (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as
time permits). See spreadsheet "v1.1 Candidate Items" for details

** Expected this week:
- N14 Updated/Final Pattern proposal (Randy): proposal direction was
approved by TC; final updates, including spec changes, have been
posted; TC to consider formally approving/adopting the proposal.
- N1a Root Install (Randy & Jason): proposal direction was approved by
TC; need details/updates, including spec changes, to formally
approve/adopt the proposal.
- N9/N10: Version representation/Revisit use of Profiles (Jason): Jason
will discuss an alternate proposal regarding the larger issue of
Profiles based on the study he is pursuing in this area.
- N12: Additional Variable Types (Lazar/Chris): need initial proposal
** In process or tabled (to resume discussion later):
- D2 Self-Documenting Schema (Howard): proposal direction was approved;
seeking volunteers to develop final proposal
- S3 Interoperability (Julia): Tabled until Julia returns; may want to
split this into separate items addressing various aspects of
interoperability

COMPLETED PROPOSALS (for reference):
- S0 Charter update (Brent): Complete/published
- N18 Use OASIS Standard for name/address (Howard): Initial
outline/sketch to determine direction was presented; TC consensus is
not to pursue further.


C. Discussion

5. Old/new business
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OVF Working Group
(target end October)
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OASIS SCA-Assembly
TC (request sent to SCA-Assembly co-chairs 08/21; no reply; sent
reminder 09/24; no reply yet)
** Adjourn 12:00 Noon US Eastern time
MINUTES
(Julia on leave of absence; Brent recorded minutes).

We have a quorum.

11. Minutes from September 18 approved without objection (note: no meeting
    September 25).
12. Administrative:
        a. None
13. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda
        a. Brent has asked OASIS staff what is required to publish our updated
            examples (with correct URLs) that were approved last week.
        b. Randy has updated and posted the namespace/RDDL documents to correctly
            reference the URL where the schema is published. We will pursue an erratum
            for the specification (Brent will generate) to point to the updated
            namespace/RDDL documents (rather than directly pointing to schema URLs
            as is now done in the specification). This will make any future updates easier
            (only RDDL docs would need to be updated, not the spec).
14. v1.1 items:
        a. N14 Updated Pattern proposal (Randy): updates were posted; general
            direction for this proposal was previously approved. Updates reviewed.
            Motion Jason, second Mark to approve this proposal. Approved
            unanimously.
        b. N1a Root Install (Randy, Jason): This was mistakenly on the agenda; it was
            approved at the last call.
        c. N9/N10 (Profile revisit): Jason posted slides outlining the proposal. In
            general, the proposal seeks to remove profiles as currently defined in favor
            of profiles as more of a concept of a contract between producer and
            consumer, with direct use of and reference to a Resource Model (such as CIM,
            CML, etc.) that contains the actual “content”. Extensions would be
            accomplished by extending the Resource Model (RM) in the way(s) defined
            for/by that RM (rather than generating an extended Profile, as is the case
            today). Merri suggests moving ProfileID to be at the level of/peer to Topology
            in the deploymentDescriptor (and namespace for type would then be sdd-
            common). Brent and Kirk ask about the type for ProfileID (alternatives to
            explore include id/idref and URI). Jason will consider/incorporate these
            changes in next round. Quenio asks about identifying a particular instance of
            a resource based on a resource type defined in an RM. Jason notes that
            parsers can just cross-reference using the ProfileID that maps to a particular
            RM, using the RM namespace to resolve any conflicts; and if RMs are
            extended as prescribed by the RM, then conflicts within a namespace would
            be avoided by following the prescribed rules/guidelines for extensions. Lazar
            asks about vendor-specific extensions and identifying those with ProfileID; do
            we need a registry? Jason notes that we expect to have a defined known set
            of profiles; some extensions will be “common”, or needed by “all”
            implementations; some will be vendor-specific and these would need their
            own ProfileIDs. This is why ProfileID allows multiple IDs to be specified; an
            implementation could specify the “base” ProfileID as well as all “extended” RM
            profiles that it supports. Quenio and Brent ask for an example to increase
            understanding of the details of the proposal, especially in cases involving RM
            extensions. TC consensus is that this is a good direction and should
            continue to be pursued. Jason will produce an example or two, as well as
          an illustration of what the “new” profile would look like, and make other
          updates (schema details about ProfileID type and location of the element
          in the hierarchy) and bring an updated proposal back to the TC for
          further review and/or action.

          Note: Brent will produce a consolidated list of approved items with pending
          specification changes so that these specification updates can be made in
          batches in the future (rather than updating the specification immediately
          after each proposal is approved).

15. Old/new business
       a. Joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter notes that they will
          consider leveraging SDD): Brent has contacted the SCA-Assembly TC co-chairs
          requesting a meeting with that TC to review/provide education on SDD. No
          response to that request yet. Brent followed up with another query on 09/24;
          no response to that yet, either.
       b. Future F2F meeting: Prior consensus that we should tentatively plan a F2F
          meeting for early 2009 (perhaps late January/early February). Please
          consider having your company host the next F2F meeting and let us
          know if you can do so, and in what location. We will discuss next week and
          open a ballot to determine specific dates.

Adjourned 11:50 US eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 09/18/2008 Meeting
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from September 11

2. Administrative

3. v1.0 status
- OASIS Standard 1.0 Complete, updated schemas posted
- Updated examples approved (Brent to work with OASIS Staff to re-
publish)
- Need to consider errata to update pointers in specification to schema
files (Randy has produced new RDDL namespace documents)

4. v1.1 updates

ACTIVE PROPOSALS (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as
time permits). See spreadsheet "v1.1 Candidate Items" for details

** Expected this week:
- N14 Updated Pattern proposal (Randy): proposal direction was approved
by TC; need final updates, including spec changes, to formally
approve/adopt the proposal.
- N1a Root Install (Randy & Jason): proposal direction was approved by
TC; need details/updates, including spec changes, to formally
approve/adopt the proposal.
- D2 Self-Documenting Schema (Howard): proposal direction was approved;
seeking volunteers to develop final proposal

** In process or tabled (to resume discussion later):
- N9/N10: Version representation /Revisit use of Profiles (Jason):
PROPOSAL TABLED; Jason plans an alternate proposal regarding the larger
issue of Profiles based on the study he is pursuing in this area.
- S3 Interoperability (Julia): Tabled until Julia returns; may want to
split this into separate items addressing various aspects of
interoperability

COMPLETED PROPOSALS (for reference):
- S0 Charter update (Brent): Complete/published
- N18 Use OASIS Standard for name/address (Howard): Initial
outline/sketch to determine direction was presented; TC consensus is
not to pursue further.


C. Discussion
- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OVF Working Group
(target end October)
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OASIS SCA-Assembly
TC (request sent to SCA-Assembly co-chairs 08/21; no reply yet)

** Adjourn 12:00 Noon US Eastern time
MINUTES
(Julia on leave of absence; Brent recorded minutes).

We have a quorum.

16. Minutes from September 11 approved without objection.
17. Administrative:
        a. None
18. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda
        a. A very nice press release was distributed by OASIS, with quotes from the TC
            chair and CA, IBM, SAP and SAS representatives.
        b. Brent has asked OASIS staff what is required to publish our updated
            examples (with correct URLs) that were approved last week.
        c. Randy has updated and posted the namespace/RDDL documents to correctly
            reference the URL where the schema is published. Please review these for
            correctness (especially Robert, Merri, who are very good at this, but all are
            encouraged to review). We will pursue an erratum for the specification to
            point to the updated namespace/RDDL documents (rather than directly
            pointing to schema URLs as is now done in the specification). This will make
            any future updates easier (only RDDL docs would need to be updated, not the
            spec).
19. v1.1 items:
        a. N14 Updated Pattern proposal (Randy): updates were posted; general
            direction for this proposal was previously approved. Chris prefers not
            specifying “pattern equals”. Overall feedback is we don’t need to declare, but
            still want to restrict. Chris: why not leave to the capabilities of runtime
            parsers? Randy: specifying patters makes for easier consumption by runtimes
            and can avoid need for complex variables. Could be other regular
            expressions in the future; start simple for now. Jason agrees with intent to
            make parsing easier by adding Patterns in SDD schema. Randy raised
            question of whether or not we want to further change schema to convert all
            attributes – this would break backward compatibility. Resolved that we would
            change only the 4 noted in the presentation, which doesn’t introduce
            backward compatibility concerns. TC Consensus is that Randy will make
            final updates, including spec changes, based on today’s feedback and
            bring back final proposal next week.
        b. N1a Root Install (Randy, Jason): Change since last review is to move the
            element under ResourceConstraint, where it fits nicely. The element includes
            an extensible enum list. Chris: Can I aggregate this if an entire install needs
            root authority? Randy: Yes, can have a Requirement for an entire IU, can have
            a constraint anywhere in the hierarchy. Lazar: why do we need such a
            constraint? Randy: some deployment processes require specific
            authorization, e.g., admin authority. Many gradations of authority will be
            platform- and vendor-specific; hence we are just defining two levels now.
            Jason: “root” not meant to imply Linux, just administrative authority. Chose
            not to model multi-level authorities such as are found in Windows. Lazar:
            could we map this via the profile? Jason: trying to keep this simple. Lazar OK
            with proposal. Motion to approve proposal (Chris), Second Jason,
            approved unanimously.
20. Old/new business
        a. Joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter notes that they will
            consider leveraging SDD): Brent has contacted the SCA-Assembly TC co-chairs
         requesting a meeting with that TC to review/provide education on SDD. No
         response to that request yet.
      b. Future F2F meeting: Prior consensus that we should tentatively plan a F2F
         meeting for early 2009 (perhaps late January/early February). Please
         consider having your company host the next F2F meeting and let us
         know if you can do so, and in what location. We will discuss next week and
         open a ballot to determine specific dates.

Adjourned 11:45 US eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 09/11/2008 Meeting
Agenda
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from September 4

2. Administrative
- Merri established as interim secretary during Julia's absence
- Leaves of Absence: Julia, Howard

3. v1.0 status
- OASIS Standard 1.0 Complete
- Need to approve updated examples
- Need to consider errata to update pointers in specification to schema
files

4. v1.1 updates

ACTIVE PROPOSALS (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as
time permits). See spreadsheet "v1.1 Candidate Items" for details

** Expected this week:
- N14 Updated Pattern proposal (Randy): proposal direction was approved
by TC; need final updates, including spec changes, to formally
approve/adopt the proposal.
- D2 Self-Documenting Schema (Howard): Initial outline/sketch to
determine direction; seek volunteers to develop final proposal
- N18 Use OASIS Standard for name/address (Howard): Initial
outline/sketch to determine direction; seek volunteers to develop final
proposal

** In process or tabled (to resume discussion later):
- N9/N10: Version representation /Revisit use of Profiles (Jason):
PROPOSAL TABLED; Jason plans an alternate proposal regarding the larger
issue of Profiles based on the study he is pursuing in this area.
- S3 Interoperability (Julia): Tabled until Julia returns; may want to
split this into separate items addressing various aspects of
interoperability

COMPLETED PROPOSALS (for reference):
- S0 Charter update (Brent): Complete/published

C. Discussion
- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OVF Working Group
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OASIS SCA-Assembly
TC (request sent to SCA-Assembly co-chairs 08/21; no reply yet)

** Adjourn 12:00 Noon US Eastern time
MINUTES
(Julia on leave of absence; Brent recorded minutes).

We have a quorum.

1. Minutes from September 4 approved without objection.
2. Administrative:
       a. Howard notes that he will be on a multi-week leave of absence beginning
           after today and he will be placed on “Leave of Absence” status for the TC
           (note: Julia is currently on Leave of Absence status for the TC).
       b. Welcome Jeff Hamm of SAS, who is a COSMOS committer and will be
           replacing Robert DeMason.
3. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda
       a. Brent notes that implementers discovered incorrect URLs in the schema files
           posted for the v1.0 standard at docs.oasis-open.org. The URLs (in comments
           and import statements) weren’t updated to reflect the actual path where the
           standard is published; Randy has updated the schema files with the correct
           URLs and Mary McRae of OASIS has published them.
       b. The previous item pointed out that our published examples have a similar
           issue in that they do not point to the URL where the standard is now
           published. Randy has updated the examples; we need to approve these so
           that they can be published. Motion Jason to approve updated examples
           published by Randy; second by Merri, approved unanimously.
       c. The previous item also pointed out that the pointers to our schema in the
           specification are also out-of-date (same issue as previous two items). TC
           agreed that we should update our namespace/RDDL documents to correctly
           reference the URL where the schema is published as part of the standard and
           then pursue an erratum for the specification to point to the updated
           namespace/RDDL documents (rather than directly pointing to schema URLs
           as is now done in the specification). Randy agreed to update the RDDL
           documents and we’ll revisit this item next week.
4. v1.1 items:
       a. N14 Updated Pattern proposal (Randy): no update this week; proposal
           direction was approved by TC; need final updates, including spec changes, to
           formally approve/adopt the proposal.
       b. D2 Self-Documenting Schema (Howard): Initial outline/sketch to determine
           direction was presented. Randy: The IUDD submission (basis of SDD
           standard) schema had annotations; the TC removed them because it was
           difficult to keep schema documentation in sync with specification (Howard
           notes this as an open issue in his presentation) and also because XMLSpy
           always included the annotations in its diagrammatic representation of the
           schema, which made for cumbersome viewing. Howard suggests processing
           the schema (perhaps via XSLT) to remove annotations when displaying in a
           tool such as XMLSpy. Jason: are there any automation tools for keeping MS-
           Word specification in sync with the schema documentation? Howard: haven’t
           found anything specific but it probably could be done and Howard has
           worked on similar tools. Randy: this could be useful provided we can
           automatically generate contents between MS-Word and schema. TC
           consensus is that we should proceed with this proposal provided we
           have some tools to automate the process of keeping the specification
           and schema in sync. Howard will investigate this; Brent will also ask OASIS
         Staff if they have any information or insight on this. We will progress this
         proposal further when someone has time to work on the final details.
      c. N18 Use OASIS Standard for name/address (Howard): Initial outline/sketch to
         determine direction was presented. Howard notes that xNAL has much more
         than we need, but we could use portions. Kirk notes that address information
         is in its own namespace, which adds additional complexity. Randy believes
         that having multiple ways to specify the address information is a problem
         (this is noted as an open issue in Howard’s presentation) and also that our
         current schema aligns with OGF-ACS, who has adopted our
         PackageDescriptor, and any change would need to be reviewed by that
         working group. Brent: if we made this change, we’d need to specify our own
         best practices, as the TC that produced xNAL doesn’t publish any. Randy: no
         one suggested use of xNAL during the OASIS review; not convinced that value
         of this change is sufficient given that we’d have to deprecate existing
         schema. Howard agrees, after learning of the OGF-ACS’s adoption of our
         PackageDescriptor, and recommends not proceeding further with the
         proposal. TC consensus is to close this without proceeding further.
      d. N1a Root Install (Randy, Jason): Initial outline/sketch to determine direction
         was presented. Howard asks about finer granularity for authority. Randy: we
         have an enumeration and could add other enum values. Jason: should we add
         enum values for those roles we already know about (e.g., DB Admin)? Randy:
         we could associate the role authority with specific resources so that the role
         authority applies to the resource; so, for example, rather than an additional
         “DB Admin” role, we would have a “Root” or “Admin” role that is associated
         with a DB resource (and so on). Howard: could use read/write/delete (etc.)
         permissions. Jason & Randy prefer role-based, as permissions would need to
         be associated with the various SDD operations. TC consensus is that this
         direction is good and the current proposal addresses “OS” sorts of
         resources (via a “Root” role) and that we should expand the proposal to
         address other sorts of resources (DB, app server, etc.) based on some
         sort of role definition. Randy and Jason will revise proposal and bring back
         next week.
5. Old/new business
      a. Joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter notes that they will
         consider leveraging SDD): Brent has contacted the SCA-Assembly TC co-chairs
         requesting a meeting with that TC to review/provide education on SDD. No
         response to that request yet.
      b. Future F2F meeting: Prior consensus that we should tentatively plan a F2F
         meeting for early 2009 (perhaps late January/early February). We will revisit
         this item during a future TC call.

Adjourned Noon US eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 09/04/2008 Meeting
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from August 28

2. Administrative
- Merri established as interim secretary during Julia's absence

3. v1.0 status
- Specification/schema v1.0 have been approved by OASIS General
Membership vote as OASIS Standard -- Wake the dog, throw a party and
tell your friends! TC will discuss the rumor that Chris is hosting a
celebration ;-)

4. v1.1 updates
A. Review the work items spreadsheet to establish target dates for
assigned work items
B. Proposals (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as time
permits)
- Updated version representation proposal from Jason: PROPOSAL TABLED;
Jason plans an alternate proposal regarding the larger issue of
Profiles based on the study he is pursuing in this area.
- Updated Pattern proposal from Randy: proposal direction was approved
by TC; need final updates, including spec changes, to formally
approve/adopt the proposal.
- Updated Interop proposal from Julia

COMPLETED PROPOSALS (for reference):
- Charter update proposal from Brent: Complete/published

C. Discussion
- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OVF Working Group
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OASIS SCA-Assembly
TC (request sent to SCA-Assembly co-chairs 08/21; no reply yet)

** Adjourn 12:00 Noon US Eastern time
MINUTES
(Julia absent; Brent recorded minutes).

We have a quorum.

1. Minutes from August 28 approved without objection.
2. Administrative:
      a. Merri’s role updated to Secretary on TC Web page to serve in interim during
          Julia’s absence.
      b. Howard notes that he will be on a multi-week leave of absence beginning
          later this month.
3. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda:   SDD is now an OASIS
   Standard! Yea!           Companies who have the appropriate level of membership in
   OASIS have been invited to provide quotes for the upcoming OASIS Press Release
   about SDD achieving Standard status (see Carol Geyer’s e-mail from yesterday). Note
   that the deadline for supplying quotes is next Friday September 12! Individual
   companies are also welcome to issue their own press releases, but Carol Geyer of
   OASIS requests that these be sent to her for fact-checking prior to issuing the
   release.
4. v1.1 items:
       a. v1.1 spreadsheet updated during meeting with target dates for most work
           items. We will use this as the guide for future meeting agenda topics.
           Spreadsheet posted on TC Documents Web page.
       b. Proposal discussion today: None; see the v1.1 spreadsheet for the list of
           work items and target dates. Next week: Randy will post remaining details for
           Pattern Proposal (already approved in concept); Howard will bring
           outlines/sketches for items D2 & N18 (schema self-documentation, use of
           OASIS name/address standard in SDD).
5. Old/new business
       a. Joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter notes that they will
           consider leveraging SDD): Brent has contacted the SCA-Assembly TC co-chairs
           requesting a meeting with that TC to review/provide education on SDD. No
           response to that request yet.
       b. Discussion of future F2F meeting: Consensus that we should tentatively plan
           a F2F meeting for early 2009 (perhaps late January/early February). We will
           revisit this item during a future TC call.

Adjourned 11:40 US eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 08/28/2008 Meeting
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from July 24 and August 14 (no
meeting July 31, August 7 and August 21; no quorum August 14 to approve
prior minutes)

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Ballot for charter updates complete; updated charter has been
published.

3. v1.0 status
- Specification/schema v1.0 have been submitted for OASIS General
Membership vote as OASIS Standard -- VOTE COMMENCED AUG. 16 AND ENDS
AUG. 31 (designated voting representative per company -- thanks to TC
members for ensuring that their company's vote has been cast!). 15% of
voting members required to vote for the ballot to be valid. As of
Wednesday August 27, we have 25 "Yes" votes (just over half of what is
needed), 0 "No" votes. PLEASE REMIND ANY VOTING MEMBERS YOU KNOW TO
CAST THEIR VOTE! OASIS reminder to go out August 27.

4. v1.1 updates
A. Please look at spreadsheet and let Brent know when you expect to
have proposals for items assigned to you
B. Proposals (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as time
permits)
- Updated version representation proposal from Jason: PROPOSAL TABLED,
but we will discuss the larger issue of profiles & resource models when
Jason completes the exercise he is pursuing in this area.
- Updated Pattern proposal from Randy: proposal direction was approved
by TC; need final updates, including spec changes, to formally
approve/adopt the proposal.
- Updated Interop proposal from Julia

COMPLETED PROPOSALS (for reference):
- Charter update proposal from Brent: Complete? (based on ballot
results)

C. Discussion
- How should the TC proceed in the near term? Do we need an in-person
meeting? If so, when and where? Any companies willing to host? Should
we "take a break" for a specified period of time, or meet less
frequently, to allow various parties to gain implementation experience
with SDD and provide feedback? Should we continue the status quo? Are
there other alternatives?
- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OVF Working Group
- Brent has action item to schedule discussion with OASIS SCA-Assembly
TC (request sent to SCA-Assembly co-chairs 08/21; no reply yet)

** Adjourn 12:00 Noon US Eastern time
MINUTES
(Julia absent; Brent recorded minutes).

We have a quorum.

1. Minutes from July 24 and August 7 approved without objection.
2. Administrative:
       a. Charter updates are now complete and published.
       b. Julia will be out for several weeks; Brent asks for volunteers to serve as
           interim secretary in Julia’s absence (to ensure that we have backup for
           administrative access on TC Web page). Merri volunteers and is approved
           unanimously (Brent will update Merri’s role on the Web page and schedule a
           brief overview of the Web administrative functions with Merri).
3. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda. Call for action to contact those who haven’t
   voted (Brent is in process of doing so).
4. v1.1 items:
       a. PLEASE, PLEASE begin work on proposals assigned to you and let Brent know
           when you expect to have something to bring to the TC. We will be out of
           proposals to work on soon.
       b. Proposal discussion today:
                 i. Regarding Profile/Resource Model, Jason notes that his investigation
                    thus far has led him to conclude that the Profile as we did in for v1.0
                    (with a namespace and schema derived from a resource model) wasn’t
                    the best approach. He believes that it’s not really useful, and doesn’t
                    really sufficiently address interoperability issues and instead that we
                    would be better off directly using a resource model. Jason is moving
                    in the direction of proposing to discard the Profile as we currently
                    know it and replace the schema “contract” with an explicit declaration
                    of supported resource model (e.g., CIM) and which portions of that
                    resource model are supported (expanding the resource model if
                    necessary using defined extensions mechanisms for that resource
                    model). Howard asks, if we discard the profile, how do we test
                    interoperability? Jason notes that we would still declare support in
                    terms of a resource model, so the “contract” would still exist, and that
                    actual interoperability details and testability issues exist with either
                    approach, so the planned proposal doesn’t affect that (that is,
                    interoperability testing remains an item to address but is not a side
                    effect of the proposal Jason plans). Agreed that we need to split our
                    “interoperability” work item into smaller, concrete chunks (such as
                    interoperability testing) and address those in the TC regardless of the
                    direction taken for the Profile.
                ii. Pattern proposal: No update this week; status remains that TC
                    approved this proposal in principle by acclamation; Randy will fill in
                    remaining details (primarily specification updates) and bring the final
                    proposal back next week for formal adoption.
              iii. No updates on interop proposal this week.
               iv. Charter proposal: Now complete!
       c. OVF discussion: Brent notes that joint discussion with OVF working group is
           possible and recommends that we pursue this after OVF 1.1 is available
           (estimate October). Brent has action item to schedule this.
5. Old/new business
       a. Joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter notes that they will
           consider leveraging SDD): Brent has contacted the SCA-Assembly TC co-
          chairs requesting a meeting with that TC to review/provide education on
          SDD. No response to that request yet.
       b. Discussion of future meetings: Are weekly calls still the right mode of
          operation? Should we suspend regular calls for a time, have less frequent
          calls, or something else? Resolved that the current mode of weekly calls is
          preferred; Chris noted that he favors this and Jason notes that he would
          prefer to continue the status quo at least for now and move to less frequent
          calls if we determine that’s merited; he is hesitant to suspend calls for any
          period of time. Merri notes that we could establish target dates for our work
          items to help keep the work moving; agreed to do this next week. TC
          consensus is to proceed with the same mode of operation. Brent notes that it
          is important to not miss two consecutive weekly calls if the member wishes
          to maintain voting rights.
       c. PLEASE, PLEASE work on your proposals this week (see the spreadsheet
          posted on the TC Web page for a list of proposals and assignments) so
          that we can continue forward progress in future meetings. Agreed that at
          next week’s meeting, we will review the current list of work items and
          establish target dates.

Adjourned 11:35 US eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 08/14/2008 Meeting
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from July 24 (no meeting July 31
or August 7)

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Ballot open to approve charter updates (9 of 10 have currently voted
yes; ballot closes August 16)

3. v1.0 status
- Specification/schema v1.0 to be submitted for OASIS General
Membership vote as OASIS Standard -- Mary McRae issued the announcement
Notice August 2; VOTE COMMENCES AUG. 16 AND ENDS AUG. 31 (designated
voting representative per company -- PLEASE ALERT YOUR COMPANY VOTING
REPRESENTATIVE).

4. v1.1 updates
A. Please look at spreadsheet and let Brent know when you expect to
have proposals for items assigned to you
B. Proposals (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as time
permits)
- Updated version representation proposal from Jason: PROPOSAL TABLED,
but we will discuss the larger issue of profiles & resource models
identified by this proposal (Julia/Jason have produced a list of SDD
"expectations" of profiles/resource models, which was reviewed
previously)
- Updated Pattern proposal from Randy: proposal direction was approved
by TC; need final updates, including spec changes, to formally
approve/adopt the proposal.
- Updated Interop proposal from Julia
- Charter update proposal from Brent: this was approved by the TC; it
requires a formal approval by electronic ballot (with a Special
Majority). Mary McRae from OASIS will set up the ballot; look for
notification and please vote.
- any others?

C. Discussion -- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time


MINUTES
(Julia absent; Brent recorded minutes).

We do not have a quorum.

1. Minutes from July 24 approval deferred to next meeting based on lack of quorum.
2. Administrative: Welcome Mark McCraw from SAS, who is joining the TC. Mark has
   experience with the Eclipse COSMOS SDD implementation.
3. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda.
4. v1.1 items:
       a. PLEASE, PLEASE begin work on proposals assigned to you and let Brent know
           when you expect to have something to bring to the TC. We will be out of
           proposals to work on soon.
       b. Proposal discussion today:
                v. Regarding Profile/Resource Model, we have agreed on the content of
                   the Profile/Resource Model Assumptions document, with minor
                   updates previously posted by Brent. Jason reports that he is in the
                   midst of an exercise to directly use a Resource Model (without a
                   Profile) with SDD (rather than a Profile based on a Resource Model).
                   This represents a possible change in direction in which a Profile
                   would extend an existing Resource Model (such as CIM), using that
                   RM’s structure and vocabulary, rather than the Profile acting as a
                   “Proxy” for the RM. The Profile still would function as a “contract”
                   between SDD producers and consumers, but the mechanism would be
                   different. TC agreed to let this exercise play out and hear a report
                   back from Jason, potentially with a new proposal, at that time.
               vi. Pattern proposal: No update this week; status remains that TC
                   approved this proposal in principle by acclamation; Randy will fill in
                   remaining details (primarily specification updates) and bring the final
                   proposal back next week for formal adoption.
              vii. No updates on interop proposal this week.
             viii. Charter proposal: No update this week; assuming that open ballot
                   (see note in “Administrative” in agenda, above) passes, the Charter
                   updates will be complete and published by OASIS Staff.
       c. OVF discussion: Brent notes that joint discussion with OVF working group is
           possible and recommends that we pursue this after OVF 1.1 is available
           (estimate October). Jason notes some concerns with OVF beginning to
           address areas that SDD already addresses; Brent agrees, and this is the
           primary motivation for the joint discussion. Brent has action item to schedule
           this.
5. Old/new business
       a. Joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter notes that they will
           consider leveraging SDD): Brent has action item to set up a meeting with that
           TC to review/provide education on SDD.
       b. PLEASE, PLEASE work on your proposals this week (see the spreadsheet
           posted on the TC Web page for a list of proposals and assignments) so
           that we can continue forward progress in future meetings.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 07/17/2008 Meeting
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from July 10 and July 17 meetings.

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

3. v1.0 status
- (Same status as last week): Ballot to submit Committee Specification
as a candidate for OASIS Standard passed by Special Majority, so
specification/schema will be submitted for OASIS General Membership
vote -- confirmed by Mary McRae; NOTICE AUG. 1; VOTE COMMENCES AUG.
16(designated voting representative per company -- PLEASE ALERT YOUR
COMPANY VOTING REPRESENTATIVE).

4. v1.1 updates
A. Please look at spreadsheet and let Brent know when you expect to
have proposals for items assigned to you
B. Proposals (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as time
permits)
- Updated version representation proposal from Jason: PROPOSAL TABLED,
but we will discuss the larger issue of profiles & resource models
identified by this proposal (Julia/Jason to produce a list of SDD
"expectations" of profiles/resource models)
- Updated Pattern proposal from Randy: proposal active, but we will
HEAR FROM JASON/MERRI ABOUT HOW THE COSMOS IMPLEMENTATION MIGHT USE
THIS PROPOSAL before completing it
- Updated Interop proposal from Julia
- New Charter update proposal from Brent
- any others?

C. Discussion -- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time


MINUTES
(Julia absent; Brent recorded minutes).

We have a quorum.

1. Minutes from July 10 and July 17 meetings approved without objection.
2. Administrative: Welcome back Quenio, with new affiliation with Acresso Software
   (formerly Macrovision). Robert Dickau and Art Middlekauff have also rejoined the TC
   as members from Acresso.
3. v1.0 status remains as noted in agenda.
4. v1.1 items:
      a. PLEASE, PLEASE begin work on proposals assigned to you and let Brent know
         when you expect to have something to bring to the TC. We will be out of
         proposals to work on soon.
      b. Proposal discussion today:
               i. We reviewed and briefly discussed the Resource Model Assumptions
                  document prepared by Julia and Jason. This is intended to facilitate
                  the overall resource model/profile discussion. TC generally agrees
                  with this document; a couple observations made resulting in minor
                  updates to the document, which Brent will post. Deferred additional
                  discussion on this topic.
              ii. Pattern proposal: Jason confirmed that from an implementation
                  perspective, having additional metadata is generally useful and this
                  proposal offers that. After discussion, we determined that this should
                  be largely independent from the Variable proposal that Howard is
                  working on and so we can move the Pattern proposal forward. TC
                  approved this proposal in principle by acclamation; Randy will fill in
                  remaining details (primarily specification updates) and bring the final
                  proposal back in 2 weeks for formal adoption.
             iii. No updates on interop proposal this week.
             iv. Charter proposal: Brent reviewed the proposed updates. Randy moved
                  to adopt these; Merri seconded; approved unanimously. Brent will
                  pursue with OASIS staff any procedural items we need to accomplish
                  to actually update the TC’s charter with this new content.
      c. OVF discussion: brief discussion; Jason notes that we need to wait for
         upcoming v1B OVF specification to have detailed discussion. Brent notes his
         own opinion that it would be good to scope OVF to “virtual image-specific”
         items and have OVF leverage SDD for general metadata, rather than expand
         OVF to cover the same space as SDD. TC generally agrees; Jason asks how we
         air this TC viewpoint. Brent will investigate if/how/when we can schedule a
         joint discussion with the OVF working group.
5. Old/new business
      a. Randy asks about a joint discussion with SCA-Assembly TC (whose charter
         notes that they will consider leveraging SDD). Brent to set up a meeting with
         that TC to review/provide education on SDD.
      b. At least 3 voting members will be absent next week. TC agrees to cancel next
         week’s meeting. PLEASE, PLEASE work on your proposals this week (see
         the spreadsheet posted on the TC Web page for a list of proposals and
         assignments) so that we can continue forward progress when we resume
         meetings on August 7.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 07/17/2008 Meeting
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from July 10 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

3. v1.0 status
- (Same status as last week): Ballot to submit Committee Specification
as a candidate for OASIS Standard passed by Special Majority, so
specification/schema will be submitted for OASIS General Membership
vote -- confirmed by Mary McRae; NOTICE AUG. 1; VOTE COMMENCED AUG.
16(designated voting representative per company -- PLEASE ALERT YOUR
COMPANY VOTING REPRESENTATIVE).

4. v1.1 updates
A. Please look at spreadsheet and let Brent know when you expect to
have proposals for items assigned to you
B. Proposals (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as time
permits)
- Updated version representation proposal from Jason
- Updated Pattern proposal from Randy
- Updated Interop proposal from Julia
- New Charter update proposal from Brent
- any others?

C. Discussion -- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time




MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Minutes were posted during the meeting. We will vote on approval next week to
   allow time to review.

2. Pattern Proposal revisited – updated presentation posted;
   Randy has identified which of the VariableExpressionType elements will be changed
   by this proposal and which will not. These charts show the types where the
   VariableExpression will be changed. Note that all places that use these types will be
   changed also. TC members are asked to study these new charts over the next week
   and come back next week prepared to discuss.
   We discuss again the issue of concatenating variables and fixed strings. As
   proposed, this would be restricted to variables. e.g. Instead of concatenating a
   parameter and a fixed string in an Argument, you would create a DerivedVariable
   that does the concatenation then use the DerivedVariable in the Argument. There are
   tradeoffs either way. Julia will come back with a couple of examples next week and
   we will discuss the pros and cons of this approach vs. allowing the concatenation
   even in the newly defined variable expressions.
   Next week, Jason and Merri will give us a 5 minute overview of current
   implementation efforts relative to this particular proposal.


3. Jason asks us – What do we want the profile to be? How detailed should it get? The
   questions raised by version really apply to all properties.
   How do we keep from “boiling the ocean”? How do we avoid creating a resource
   model? The SDD assumes a resource model and may refer to anything in it that
   needs to be known during deployment. Do we really want to put a profile in the
   middle of this?
   Julia will create bulleted list of SDD spec assumptions about a resource model and
   pass it to Jason for additions and revisions. Then we’ll use this for the next round of
   discussion.

4. Standard voting process: each OASIS member (company) casts one vote. TC
   members – know who your voting member is and make sure they plan to vote. At
   least 15% of the overall voting membership must vote yes for it to become a
   standard. If 15% vote and no one votes no, then it is a standard. If 25% of the votes
   cast are no, then it fails. If 15% vote and some, but less than 25% voted no, then it
   goes back to the TC to determine if more work is needed. If vote fails, it can be
   resubmitted.

5. OVF – We need to return to this discussion soon. There is a ballot out for OVF 1B.

6. Next week: Resume 2 items from this week: (1) brief overview from Jason/Merri on
   use of what's in "pattern" proposal, to help refine the proposal; and (2) continue the
   resource model/profile discussion, hopefully with the draft info that Julia and Jason
   will generate. Also, look briefly at upcoming proposals – including the ones created
   from the interop discussion.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 07/10/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

0. Elect temporary chair (Brent on vacation) and, if necessary,
temporary secretary

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from June 26 meeting (no meeting
July 3).

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

3. v1.0 status
- (Same status as last week): Ballot to submit Committee Specification
as a candidate for OASIS Standard passed by Special Majority, so
specification/schema will be submitted for OASIS General Membership
vote (designated voting representative per company -- please alert your
company representative). Because we just missed the June 15 cutoff date
for submission, this will go to General Membership vote in August, not
July.

4. v1.1 updates
A. Please look at spreadsheet and let Brent know when you expect to
have proposals for items assigned to you
B. Proposals (review/discuss/take action on available proposals as time
permits)
- New version representation proposal from Jason
- Updated Pattern proposal from Randy
- Updated Interop proposal from Julia
- New Charter update proposal from Brent
- any others?

C. Discussion -- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time



MINUTES
We have a quorum.

Brent is not here today. Julia is elected temporary chair and Merri temporary secretary.

* Minutes from meeting on June 26, 2008 approved.
* 1.0 status unchanged from last meeting
* 1.1 updates
        # Continue to let Brent know when you have proposals to submit.
        # Randy's proposal:
                 Checked on XPath and Java regex and both were way more
complicated than what we need.
                 Howard suggests "glob" instead of "wildcard", but glob
is more complicated, so he changes his mind.
                 We just want the "*" we think.
                 Julia wants clarification on concat of variables, Randy
to find locations in the schema where he is proposing these changes be
                         made, he's not proposing that all locations be
changed, just ones where we have Name and things that need to be
                         more than a static string.
                 This is not a replacement for VariableExpressionType.
                 Randy couldn't come up with a reasonable example that
would require that we support negation. Julia doesn't agree with the
                         comment associated with negation related to the
test value.
                 Lazar is concerned that this is too simple.
                 Action Item: Randy to go through schema and bring back
to the TC a list of all the places in the schema that he is proposing
                         changing, so we can talk it through more.
         # Jason's version strings proposal:
                 Really just presenting to get a feel for which
direction the TC thinks we should pursue.
                 Trying to answer the question, "How does SDD producer
know what to specify so that the SDD consumer can process the version
                         information correctly and successfully?"
                 For example, there are three different and correct ways
to get the version info for Windows XP, and all three return different
                         information. How does the SDD consumer know
which one the SDD producer intended?
                 Generally we feel that the second suggestion in the
proposal is the way that we would like to proceed. This would
associate
                         the version number string more closely with a
resource that is defined in a profile.
                 Julia suggests that we need to be able to express "the
way" to determine the version, by specifying in the profile the way an
                         app defines their version, which actually
applies to all properties of resources.
                 Basically what we are interested in doing is turning
what we stated in 1.0 into something more concrete.
                 Action Item: Jason to pursue proposal on updates to the
profile.
* Adjourned meeting at 11:52 AM EST.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 06/26/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from June 19 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Discuss whether to meet next week (July 3; US holiday)

3. v1.0 status
- Three statements of use submitted (IBM, SAS, CA -- thanks to all
submitters!)
- Ballot closed to submit Committee Specification as a candidate for
OASIS Standard.
- Ballot passed by Special Majority, so specification/schema will be
submitted for OASIS General Membership vote (designated voting
representative per company -- please alert your company
representative). Because we just missed the June 15 cutoff date for
submission, this will likely go to General Membership vote in August,
not July

4. v1.1 updates
A. Please look at spreadsheet and let Brent know when you expect to
have proposals for items assigned to you
B. Proposals -- Interop proposal from Julia (updated Pattern proposal
from Randy next week); any others?
C. Discussion -- Continue OVF discussion (as time permits)

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time



MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Minutes from 6/19/2008 approved without comment or objection.

2. Shall we cancel next week’s meeting due to the US holiday? Yes. Next week’s
   meeting will be cancelled.

3. 1.0 status as is as described in the agenda

4. Please let Brent know when you can have your proposals ready for discussion.

5. Interoperability discussion – charts were posted by Julia last week.
       a. Add an issue to our list – “Represent version formats in the profile”.
          (Owner=Jason) Target for discussion of the proposal is 2 weeks. Today’s
          discussion noted that it would not be desirable to do this on a per resource
          basis – that there are probably commonalities in real-world version formats
          that can be taken advantage of.
       b. Artifact assumptions – we will open an issue for further discussion.
          Owner=Jason.
       c. Custom logic – we will open an issue for further discussion. Owner=Julia.
       d. Mapping actual resources to resource type – we will open an issue for further
          discussion. Owner=Chris (assigned in Chris’ absence since he had to drop a
          few minutes early). Discussion revealed current, somewhat obscured,
          assumption that the rules about determining when a resource is a legitimate
          member of the set of resources with a particular type are set by the resource
          model. We also noted that the resource model is not a first class entity is
          SDD deployment.

6. Next meeting: July 10. Agenda – updated pattern proposal from Randy; Version
   format proposal from Jason.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 06/19/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

0. Elect temporary chair (Brent has a conflict today)

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from June 12 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- TC public page has been updated with latest status, pointers to
latest documents

3. v1.0 status
- Three statements of use submitted (IBM, SAS, CA -- thanks to all
submitters!)
- Ballot open to submit Committee Specification as a candidate for
OASIS Standard. Please vote if you haven't
- If ballot passes by Special Majority, specification/schema will be
submitted for OASIS General Membership vote (designated voting
representative per company -- please alert your company
representative). Because we just missed the June 15 cutoff date for
submission, this will likely go to General Membership vote in August,
not July

4. v1.1 updates
A. Please look at spreadsheet and let Brent know when you expect to
have proposals for items assigned to you
B. Proposals -- any for today? (updated one from Randy, new one from
Julia?)
C. Discussion -- any for today? (continue OVF discussion?)

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time




MINUTES
We have a quorum.

0. Elect temporary chair: Julia will chair, Merri will scribe.

1. Minutes from 6/12/2008 approved without comment or objection.

2. Administrative – see agenda

3. v1.0 status
   Submission vote closes tomorrow. 8 out of 9 voting members have voted YES. The
   9th member is Howard, who is on vacation.

4. Pattern Proposal

   Changes that Randy made based on last week’s discussion: added extensible list at
   Howard's suggestion & added examples.

   Julia (who was not here for the discussion last week) had three comments:
   1) We intentionally removed support for expressions that had been there in pre-
   submission version. We should look carefully at the implications of adding support
   for expressions. VariableExpressionType is used in a lot of places. (Julia does feel
   like adding expressions is probably the right thing to do.)
   2) We use concatenation of variable values with fixed strings in our examples, but
   this proposal doesn't seem to allow that. This is an important capability.
   3) Make the default be variable reference so that it matches 1.0.

   Randy: For #2, Howard has a work item to address the variable expression
   restriction definition. Let’s wait to see what he comes up with then circle back.

   A suggestion to add a second variable expression type that includes the type
   attribute rather than adding the attribute to elements of VariableExpressionType. It
   could be done either way. Compatibility with 1.0 needs to be considered. Let’s
   return to this question.

   Julia: Remembers difficulty implementers had with variable expressions and parsing
   them, and wants to circle back and see what the difficulties were.

   Randy: Problem was that they couldn't tell how to parse it, they had to do a char by
   char compare. This proposal provides a hint that makes the parsing easier.

   Lazar: Asks if this is xPath expression format, not xPath - might be confusing.
   Suggests using the regular expressions that are already in Java.

   Randy: We can have other enumerations & the names can be changed. He just came
   up with something this morning, they aren't set in stone, he was just giving an
   example of something other than what we already have. The simpler the better
   though, but we definitely need something like this.

   Randy: Pick a spec that is common, easy to use, and simple (doesn't have to be
   XPath). It needs to be able to express "NOT", "OR", and have substring support. We
   could even define more granular patterns like "xpathNot" or "xpathOr"...

   Lazar: Look at java.util.regex.pattern.

   Randy to look into it.

   Remaining questions:

   1) Does this help? Julia to check with implementers of earlier versions to discuss
   problems with implementing support for expressions; also look for implications of
   allowing expressions.
   2) What pattern should we use? Randy and Lazar to look for other possible specs.
   3) Should default be literal or variable ref? Julia and Randy to discuss offline.
   4) Do we know how granular we want to make it? E.g. do we want to allow every
   possible type of expression or limit it to substrings or something in between?
   Depends on which pattern we use.

   Jason: Suggests that maybe we could just not say which pattern.

   Randy: We can make the enumeration extensible.

   Julia: Follow up question: Are there any interoperability implications of this proposal?
   Is there anything we need to say to implementers about what they need to do to
   support this?

   Jason: We could maybe put that information in the profile rather than in the spec.
   Volunteers to assist Randy and Lazar with modeling.

   Julia: Maybe this proposal shouldn't be done separately from Howard's...


5. Interop Discussion – slides posted by Julia. No discussion held today.

6. OVF Discussion – no discussion today.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 06/12/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from April 17 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- new TC member(s)

3. v1.0 status

4.   v1.1 updates
A.   Overview/taking stock
B.   Proposals -- any for today?
C.   Discussion -- any for today?

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time




MINUTES
Note: resuming regular weekly TC calls after hiatus agreed to in April 17 meeting.

We have a quorum.

1. Minutes from 4/17/2008 approved without objection.

2. Julia is absent today; Brent will record minutes.

     Welcome to new TC member Kirk Wilson from CA. Kirk works in CA Labs Research
     group and has participated in OASIS WSDM, WS-RF and WS-Notification standards
     (and others outside OASIS).

3. v1.0 Standards Submission package is nearly complete (see “Submission Package”
   document posted in “Standards” folder on TC documents page). We are awaiting the
   three statements of use; CA, IBM and SAS plan to supply these and as soon as they
   are posted to the TC Web page, Brent will submit the package. If we submit by June
   15, that will enable general membership vote on SDD as an OASIS Standard during
   July. Brent will send an e-mail to the TC when the submission is made.

4. v1.1:

        a. See the “v1.1 Candidate items” document posted in “Working Documents”
             folder of TC documents page. Please send Brent your plans/tentative
             schedule for proposals for any items assigned to you.
        b.   Proposals: Randy posted an initial discussion proposal (see “Pattern Proposal”
             in “Working Documents” folder of TC documents page). We discussed this;
           Howard had several suggestions, including enabling more robust expressions
           (perhaps XPath or similar). We also determined that it would be useful to
           allow for various expressions, from literal string to expressions. Randy will
           generate a detailed proposal, including illustrative use case(s), and bring that
           back to a future TC call. Action (Brent): fine-tune the Proposal template, add
           placeholder for scenarios/use cases and clarify guidance on the identification
           number for the proposal (corresponds to identifier in spreadsheet).
      c.   Discussion: We discussed alignment with the OVF standard and agreed that it
           is worthwhile to pursue raising awareness of SDD and offering SDD education
           to the DMTF OVF working group, as it seems apparent that there might be
           overlap between future OVF specifications and SDD. Actions (Brent): send
           information about OVF to TC; develop a sketch/outline of possible SDD-OVF
           overlaps/synergy opportunities; contact chair of DMTF OVF working group to
           determine if some sort of joint discussion between that group and SDD TC is
           possible and desired.

5. No old or new business. Meeting adjourned approximately 11:45 US Eastern Time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 04/17/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from April 10 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

3. Standardization and document/publication status
A. Specification: initial submission complet for publication and
Committee Specification vote BUT the approved version needs to be
updated to "cd04" status; in work
B. Primer: submitted for publication (cross-references will need to be
updated after specification reaches CS status)
C. Starter Profile Material: submitted for publication (cross-
references will need to be updated after specification reaches CS
status)
D. Examples: submitted for publication (cross-references will need to
be updated after specification reaches CS status)

4. Remaining work
- Version 1.1: Develop action plan to address the items that were
prioritized last week.

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time




MINUTES
We do not have a quorum at the start of the meeting. We achieve quorum at 10 after.

1. Minutes from 4/10/2008.

2. Brent has no new news on future participation of our former Macrovision reps.

3. Brent submitted the specification to the OASIS staff last week – whereupon we were
   told that the name and status of the document needed to be CD04 (Committee Draft
   04) not PR1-R01 (Public Review 1 – revision 1). Brent made all the changes and
   resubmitted. The official TC vote on the standard will begin soon. Vote will be run by
   the OASIS staff. 2/3 of voting members must vote YES for this vote to pass. An
   Abstain vote reduces the total number against which the 2/3 majority is calculated.

4. The expository documents have been sent to Mary McRae to publish on docs.oasis-
   open.org and should appear there very soon.
5. 1.1 issues – it is time to assign owners to issues. We are not making commitments
   to dates yet. An updated version of the 1.1 issues list that includes the priorities we
   assigned last week has been posted by Brent. A new version of the document that
   includes assignments will be posted after this meeting by Brent. Only items that
   someone volunteered for will have owners. We made it through the medium and
   high priority items and most have owners assigned. We agreed to add a new
   worksheet to our issues spreadsheet as a place to collect issues that come from the
   COSMOS SDD runtime work and other implementation efforts. We also moved the
   three profile-related items over to that worksheet.

6. We voted to take a break from our weekly meetings to allow time to prepare
   proposals and since several people will be out during the next month. Our next
   meeting will be June 5th. Jason, Julia and Randy all plan to have proposals ready to
   discuss at that time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 04/10/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
Agenda:
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from April 3 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

3. Standardization and document/publication status
A. Specification: "Housekeeping" updates complete; ready to submit for
publication and Committee Specification vote
B. Primer: Minor updates for publication ("housekeeping" + example
updates to match new examples) complete; ready to submit for
publication
C. Starter Profile Material: Minor updates for publication (RDDL,
"housekeeping") complete; ready to submit for publication
D. Examples: minor updates for publication (to match starter profile
updates) complete; ready to submit for publication

4. Remaining work
- Version 1.1: Continue discussion of items to address and prioritize
those items.

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time




MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Minutes for 4/03/2008 are approved as posted without comment or objection.

2. Administrative: Brent has some new information about how the Macrovision changes
   have affected Quenio’s and Robert’s participation. What he has learned is that
   Macrovision is the OASIS member, but that Quenio and Robert are now employees of
   Acresso. They are pursuing membership and we hope to welcome them back
   sometime soon.

3. Standardization and document/publication status: Document updates, link updates,
   references, etc. have been made in the specification. Brent has posted these
   updates. Housekeeping changes are the only changes in the specification. Brent will
   submit the specification to OASIS today. The primer and profile docs housekeeping
   changes are almost completed. When Brent receives them, they will also be posted
   and submitted to OASIS.

4. Remaining work – 1.1 Issues Prioritization – Brent has posted a spreadsheet
Brent will update the spreadsheet as we discuss the items so the main results of
todays discussion can be seen by looking at the update to the issues spreadsheet
that Brent will post after the meeting. Only issues will be recorded in the minutes.
Our first pass approach will be to give each item the highest priority assigned to it
by any member company. High priority means we MUST have a disposition of the
item before shipping 1.1; Medium priority means we should have a disposition; Low
priority means we’ll address it if we get to it. We made it through all items in the
spreadsheet without the need to record any issues.
TC MEMBERS: Please take a look at the new issue priorities and identify the
proposals you are prepared to create or discussions you would like to lead. We will
assign owners to issues next week.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 04/03/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from March 27 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Review ballot results (2)

3. Standardization and document/publication status
A. Primer: Need minor updates for publication ("housekeeping" + example
updates to match new examples).
B. Starter Profile Material: Approval ballot passed; working on updates
for publication (RDDL, "housekeeping")
C. Examples: minor updates made for publication (to match starter
profile updates).

4. Remaining work
- Version 1.1: Initiate discussion of items to address and prioritize
those items. Brent will post an updated list of candidate items with
mapping of items to supporting use cases.

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time




MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Minutes for 3/27/2008 are approved as posted without comment or objection.

2. Administrative:
      a. The examples and profile ballots passed with a couple of minor comments.
         This means all our expository documents are ready to be published – after
         minor updates of links. Merri has the pen for those updates.
      b. Dell has decided to discontinue their association with OASIS so Tom Studwell
         and John Zhang are no longer members of the committee. We will miss their
         valuable contributions.
      c. The Macrovision transition has completed. Brent will be finding out if there
         will be continued participation from Quenio and Robert. (We miss them.)

3. We briefly review the 1.1 Issues Spread sheet was posted by Brent.
      a. Howard notes that A2 is not alignment with another standard even though it
          is in the alignment section, and that it should be simple to accomplish. Brent
          notes that it is still a sort of alignment so we leave it in the alignment
          section.
      b. The virtualization support item is moved to the alignment section as OVF
          alignment.
       c. Julia notes 3 schema issue items to add:
                i. The SDD author may know a lot more about what is needed to
                   validate a parameter than can be communicated currently in the SDD.
                   Let’s consider additional parameter metadata and/or parameter types.
               ii. Default strings may need to be non-English.
              iii. Valid values and default values for parameters may vary by locale.
       d. There are also issues relative to the profile – including the issue of making it
          normative. Julia noted 3 profile items to add to the profile bucket. More
          information on these will be provided later. Brent will create a profile bucket
          in the spread sheet.
       e. One of the issues is the “media” descriptor. Julia notes that she has been
          looking at the SML-IF standard and thinks we may get what we need without
          too much work by extending SML-IF.

4. What is our 1.1 timing? We will start work on 1.1. now but wait a while to actually
   branch a 1.1 schema and spec. Ideally this will happen after 1.0 standardization is
   complete so that we won’t have two active branches. When will we finish? Randy
   suggests, and Jason concurs, that a significant driver of our end date should be the
   needs of the open source SDD runtime work (COSMOS).

5. 1.1 Prioritization – ALL TC MEMBERS – please look at the 1.1 issues list over the next
   week and be prepared to discuss your priorities next week. Please identify each issue
   as high, medium or low priority. After prioritization, we can get started working on
   proposals.

6. TC MEMBERS – do you know of other companies that would like to join this work?
   This is a good time to add contributors, so if you know of anyone potentially
   interested in joining, encourage them to do it now.

7. Meeting timing: Should we go to every other week? Opinions expressed on both
   sides with the majority being in favor of every other week. Jason proposes a middle
   ground. Go to every other week right now, and then if we realize that the runtime is
   going to need 1.1 earlier than it looks like we can be done, then we’ll go back to
   weekly. Randy proposes that we do as Jason suggests with the modification that we
   continue with weekly calls until we have the 1.1 issues list prioritized and proposals
   assigned. So, TC MEMBERS please do your prioritization and think about which
   proposals you can sign up for.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 03/27/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from March 20 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

3. Public Review is now complete!
TC vote to initiate approval of Committee Specification for PR02
revision of the specification (ballot performed by OASIS TC
Administrator)

4. Remaining work
A. Primer: ballot open now for final approval.
B. Starter Profile Material: Complete (approval ballot passed); working
on publication
C. Examples: ballot open now for final approval.
D. Conformance Document: Complete (approval ballot passed, content
incorporated in specification)
E. Version 1.1: Initiate discussion of items to address and prioritize
those items. Brent has posted a mapping of known deferred items to
supporting use cases.

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time




MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Minutes for 3/20/2008 are approved as posted without comment or objection.

2. Administrative: Merri is unable to attend and has requested that her proxy vote be
   passed to Ed from SAS. OASIS bylaws allow this. No objections are voiced. Brent does
   state that we would like to limit the use of proxy votes.

3. Public Review – only two comments received. One was a simple bug fix; the second
   will be part of the 1.1 discussion re: the specification of version formats.
   Also, conformance information has been added as explanatory information. This is
   not a substantive change.
   The TC can vote today to open a ballot to approve this as an OASIS Committee
   Specification. We do not open the ballot – the OASIS staff runs this ballot. This is a
   vote of the TC members. This vote requires a special majortiy to pass: 2/3 vote yes
   and no more than ¼ vote no. This is not the last step in getting to standardization.
   The next step is a vote by general membership. Each OASIS member company has a
   designated voting rep. This vote runs for multiple weeks and requires a special
   majority. After the general membership vote the specification goes to the OASIS
   steering committee for final ratification. It is at this point that we need three
   statements of use.

   Brent requests a roll call vote to petition OASIS to open the Committee Specification
   ballot on pr01-r01. Motion to petition OASIS to open the Committee …. ballot is
   made by Chris and seconded by Jason. No further discussion.
   Howard: Yes
   John: Yes
   Randy: Yes
   Julia: Yes
   Lazaar: Yes
   Chris: Yes
   Robert from SAS: Yes
   Jason: Yes
   Ed (for Merri): Yes

   Vote passes unamiously. Brent will get the final housekeeping done on the spec –
   producing pdf, etc. and then pass this to Merri.

4. Primer – Please vote if you have not already. This requires a full majority. If not
   enough people vote, it won’t pass.

5. Starter Profile – Previously approved. Still waiting for publication. Decided we need
   rdl documents and we are awaiting the cr

6. Examples – Please vote if you have not already. cim: discussion…

7. Conformance Document – approved and incorporated in the specification.

8. SDD Version 1.1 – Brent posted a spread sheet called “Deferred Items” under
   Reference Material.

9. Old/New business –
      a. Now that Macrovision has sold their software business, do we still have
         representation? Brent will try to find out.
      b. COSMOS update: Jason is a committer. Eric Rose from IBM is nominated to be
         committer. IBM and SAS are both going through legal process to contribute
         code. Reviewing Change Analyzer code from IBM that parses and analyzes
         SDDs to identify what can be used. SAS has code that will handle a lot of the
         mechanics like processing artifacts, discovering versions, etc. The team is
         currently gathering requirements for the installation of the full COSMOS
         project deliverables. The goal is to use the SDD runtime being developed to
         install COSMOS. Also want to include registration of the deployed software
         with the COSMOS CMDB. Net, the SDD runtime is really “getting off the
         ground”. Brent notes that this is significant progress. Company participants
         in this work are SAS, IBM, CA and Compuware. Jason is working to grow that
         list. We discuss whether participation in this work constitutes use of the
         specification that qualifies for an OASIS statement of use. i.e. if we have 3
         companies as open-source project contributors, would that qualify as the 3
         statements of use?
      c. Statement of use is a statement from the OASIS TC Process:
              Statement of Use", with respect to a specification, is a written statement
              by an OASIS Organizational Member stating that it is successfully using or
              implementing that specification in accordance with the conformance
   clauses specified in Section 2.18, and stating whether its use included the
   interoperation of multiple independent implementations.
Also, from Brent’s notes from the TC Editor/Chair briefing given by Mary
McRae at last year's OASIS Symposium:
         Statements of use can be of many forms (interop/prototype/etc.;
           need not be products)
   Brent would like us to have a discussion soon re: expected statements of
   use.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 03/20/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from March 6 meeting (Note: March 13 meeting
was cancelled)

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Last week's meeting attendance

3. Public review comments review & disposition (no new PR comments received as of
end of day March 18 -- Public Review is now complete!)
- next step: incorporate updates to specification and initiate approval of Committee
Specification (ballot performed by OASIS TC Administrator)

4. Remaining work
A. Final Committee Draft for Primer -- Brent has incorporated all agreed-upon changes
(Lazar's changes, Brent's responses to Julia's previous comments, updated "Conditions",
"substitution value" and "weights" explanations to use the existing (updated by Randy)
example). Updated version was posted for review; can consider a motion to open ballot
for final approval.
B. Starter Profile Material -- Updates after approval ballot complete and approved;
working on publication.
C. Example Updates: complete and posted (we should probably formally approve these
as Committee Draft?)
D. Conformance Document -- Updates after ballot approval were posted; need to approve
the updates and then incorporate the result into the specification.
E. Version 1.1: Initiate discussion of items to address and prioritize those items. Brent
will post a mapping of known deferred items to supporting use cases.

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time


MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Minutes for our last meeting are approved without comment or objection.

2. Last week’s meeting was cancelled with short notice. It will not affect anyone’s
   voting rights.

3. Primer discussion
   Brent notes a small number of changes that need to be made including:
      a) The addition of a ResultingResource statement to the SimpleAppClient
          example.
      b) A note from Lazaar that should have been addressed and removed.
      c) Reword the text about the monolithic example to talk about the features
          rather than the support for multiple operating systems.
      d) 3 minor editing issues that Julia found.

   Motion to open ballot to approve the primer was made, seconded and passed.


4. Conformance chapter discussion
   Three minor changes were made and have been reviewed. Motion to open ballot to
   approve conformance chapter was made, seconded and passed. Julia will merge in
   the conformance chapter to the specification, modify URL’s and post – today. Merri
   will review the merge and Brent will generate pdf and html files.

5. Example ballot
   Motion to open ballot to approve the examples was made, seconded and passed.

6. OASIS Symposium
       Brent, Randy and Julia submitted a presentation proposal and agreed to do a
   tutorial instead. Brent will post the slides for that tutorial so TC members can review.
   These will be submitted tomorrow so if you see anything that needs significant
   change please send comments immediately. (There will be some opportunity to
   modify this after tomorrow.)
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 03/06/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from February 28 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Last week's meeting attendance
- New TC rules (see e-mail)

3. Public review comments review & disposition (no new PR comments
received as of 8:00 a.m. ET March 05). [PR ends in 12 days!]

4. Remaining work
A. Final Committee Draft for Primer -- Brent has incorporated Lazar's
recent changes, and Brent's responses to Julia's previous comments, and
updated the "Conditions" explanation to use the existing example.
Currently working with Randy on updated examples to illustrate approved
suggestions from Lazar (weights and substitution value examples)
B. Starter Profile Material -- Review ballot results.
C. Example Update -- update examples to match Primer & Starter Profile
and to use appropriate URIs; determine readiness and methodology for
review & vote.
D. Conformance Document -- Review ballot results.

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time


MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Feb. 28 meeting minutes approved without objection.

2. Administrative (1): Because of technical (phone and e-mail) problems last week, all
   regular attendees and/or those who sent e-mail indicating their difficulty attending
   will be counted as present for last week's meeting for determining voting rights.

3. Administrative (2): The OASIS Steering Committee has approved a few process
   changes (e-mailed to the TC). The only one that is likely to affect us, at least in the
   near term, is that we must designate ONE of the forms of documents we publish
   (Word, PDF, HTML) as the "authoritative" version (presumably this will be our Word
   documents in most/all cases).
4. Administrative (3): Julia left the meeting unexpectedly. The minutes here were
   provided by Brent. (Thank you Brent.)

5. No new public review comments received. Brief discussion about revisiting Jason's
   public review comment that was closed last week; Julia/Randy to discuss offline.

6. Primer: Brent has all changes complete except additions of weights and substitution
   values. Because these need to be added to examples, Brent working with Randy to
   add to examples (Randy will post updates), then add to Primer. Review "final" Primer
   draft next week and consider for subsequent vote.

7. Starter Profile: Ballot passed with more than a Full Majority. There were minor
   comments from Randy and Julia. Jason has made and posted an update to address
   those comments. We reviewed the updated draft and approved it unanimously; this
   updated draft will be the Committee Draft (CD01) draft to be published. Merri
   agreed, in Jason's absence, to make the remaining updates necessary for publication
   (change URIs on cover page, change footer, other "housekeeping" items). Brent will
   use Merri's result and generate PDF and HTML versions of the document. Brent to
   check with Mary McRae of OASIS to see if we need to define namespaces and
   generate RDDL documents for the Starter Profile like we did for the
   specification/schema (we think not, because Starter Profile is expository, not
   normative, but we'll find out for sure).

8. Examples: Randy to update examples as noted in earlier "Primer" discussion.

9. Conformance Document: Ballot passed with more than a Full Majority. Randy, Julia
   and Robert Dickau had comments. Merri has been working to address these
   comments; we believe we have the substance of the updated document complete.
   Brent has folded the Conformance information into the "Conformance" chapter of the
   specification, which is where it is intended to end up. Still have a few updates to
   complete to the material to finish addressing comments. We'll review the updated
   document next week and we can vote on the amended document during the call.
   Because this is an addition to the specification, it won't be published separately (it
   will be published with the next level of the specification).

10. Other business: Randy asked about requirements for publishing expository
    documents; responses/plans are described in earlier "Starter Profile" item of these
    minutes. Randy observed that we're nearing completion on our "remaining work"
    items and asked about moving toward considering the specification version 1.1
    items. Brent noted that we have a list of deferred items. Randy recommended that
    we map those items to existing use cases as a place to start the version 1.1
    discussion and the TC agreed with this approach; Brent will do this (target next
    week). We'll review items and discuss a plan for moving forward with version 1.1
    content, although once public review ends for version 1.0, we'll need to continue
    progressing that specification through the standardization process (we're nearing
    the end!). One participant claimed that Jason was partying while the TC was working
    earnestly, but no motion was raised to address this. :-)

Meeting adjourned approximately 11:30 a.m. US Eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 02/28/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from February 21 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

3. Public review comments review & disposition (no new PR comments
received as of 8:00 a.m. ET Feb. 28; however, we have the open item
about VersionRangeType continued from last week).

4. Remaining work
A. Final Committee Draft for Primer -- Brent has incorporated Lazar's
recent changes, and Brent's responses to Julia's previous comments, and
is working on remaining approved suggestions from Lazar (conditions &
weights in an existing example; add substitution value example)
B. Starter Profile Material -- BALLOT OPEN FOR APPROVAL.
C. Example Update -- update examples to match Starter Profile and to
use appropriate URIs; determine readiness and methodology for review &
vote.
D. Conformance Document -- BALLOT OPEN FOR APPROVAL.

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time


MINUTES
The phone system was not working today. Jason sent an email with an alternate phone
number and enough people called in to create a quorum. Because of the phone
difficulties, today will not count as an absence for voting right purposes.

   1. Minutes approval: Minutes from February 21 approved without objection.

   2. Administrative

   3. Public Review Comments – VersionRangeType
      Julia explains her objection to the proposal this way… Version and fix name in
      the SDD schema represent two distinct concepts from the domain we are
      modeling with the SDD. The concept of version covers information about the
      software level that is single, that is, there can be only one current “version”. e.g.
      If you know that the version is 2.1.0.2 then you know that it is not 2.1.0.3. But
      realize that version does not have to be numeric and does not have to be called
      “version”. If it is something that follows this pattern, i.e. there is only one current
      value for it, then it matches the concept of version. Fixes, on the other hand, are
      multiple. That is, there can be many different fixes all reported as being applied
      to the software at the same time. e.g. Knowing that Fix 123 is installed does not
      tell you anything about whether or not any other fix is installed.
   Jason brings up the concept of supersedes and wonders if this really indicates
   that the concepts of version and fix as described are too simple. The response is
   that there is much implied knowledge about both versions and fixes and this
   implied knowledge really does vary dramatically. But, version and fix in the SDD
   are not about implied knowledge. They are there to map to information reported
   about the level of software on the system.
   Jason asks how the Windows concept of Service Pack would be modeled given
   this view of things. The response is that Windows concept of Service Pack is part
   of the information provided about the Windows operating system that matches
   the concept of version. As such, it should be modeled as part of the version
   string.
   Jason notes that this is essentially what the proposal is trying to accomplish. By
   moving fix name into min and max version, it becomes part of the expression of
   the structure of the Window’s version.
   The response is that we considered at one of the F2F meetings (prior to Jason
   joining our group) adding schema to provide a structure for versions. In the end,
   we recognized that, while many uses of version were structured, there was no
   single structure that would work for all real-world existing versions. We decided
   that understanding the version was the job of the runtime and the capability was
   communicated via runtime. That is, it is up to the runtime to understand the
   structure of version for a particular resource type and to communicate via profile
   how that structure is represented in the version value string.
   We had some discussion of the possibility of revisiting the provision of a version
   structure in the 1.1 time frame and there is general agreement that it is worth
   having that discussion – noting that any change will have to be backwardly
   compatible. (This can be as simple as providing a choice between string and the
   structured format.) Jason withdraws the proposal for 1.0 and will guide the
   COSMOS runtime work to define the structure of Windows version to be
   represented in the value strings used in the SDD.

4. Primer – status as described in the agenda. No additional discussion today.

5. Starter Profile – YES votes are coming in. Julia had three comments which Jason
   has addressed.

6. Example Update - No discussion of this topic.

7. Conformance Document – YES votes are coming in. Julia had quite a few
   comments and suggested changes. Merri has looked at those comments and
   disagrees with some of them. We discuss a possible compromise for one aspect
   of the disagreement that involves leaving in Julia’s additions to the “2.2 Extended
   Properties in CL2” table but not deleting the “2.4 Altered Properties in CL2” table.
   Merri said she would think about it. Brent said he would look at the modified text
   and respond with a compromise suggestion.
   Julia also suggested changing “Properties” to “Types”. It was noted that this had
   been changed previously from “Data Types” to “Properties” because of a
   comment by Brent. After a short discussion, Brent was comfortable with letting
   this be Types.

8. Old/new business
   There was a COSMOS discussion call with Jason and Dell people. DMTF is
   proposing OVF format (Open Virtualization Format). Some people think OVF is
   similar to SDD, John is unsure that there's overlap currently, but thinks that there
   might be in the future as OVF expands. He suggests we contact DMTF to find out
   what OVF is and what overlap there might be. Brent has some knowledge of this
and will follow up.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 02/21/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from February 7 and February 14
meetings

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

3. Public review comments review & disposition (one new PR comment
received (from Jason Losh) as of 1:00 p.m. ET Feb. 20).

4. Remaining work
A. Final Committee Draft for Primer -- Brent has incorporated Lazar's
recent changes, and Brent's responses to Julia's previous comments, and
is working on remaining approved suggestions from Lazar (conditions &
weights in an existing example; add substitution value example)
B. Starter Profile Material -- Determine readiness for review & vote.
C. Example Update -- update examples to match Starter Profile and to
use appropriate URIs; determine readiness and methodology for review &
vote.
D. Conformance Document -- initial review and determine plans for
publication

5. Old/new business


MINUTES
We do have a quorum, Brent agrees to take notes/act as temporary secretary in Julia’s
absence.

   1. Minutes approval: Minutes from February 7 and February 14 approved without
      objection

   2. Administrative: reminder from Brent that maintaining voting rights requires that
      a TC member not miss two consecutive meetings (some members recently have
      missed two consecutive meetings). Brent offers that if significant votes are taken
      by ballot, then active members who have temporarily lost voting rights MAY be
      added to vote on particular ballots if the TC agrees.

   3. One new public review comment (from Jason Losh, SAS). Problem is no good way
      to specify fix “ranges” similar to version ranges. Proposal is to add fixName to
      minVersion, maxVersion.

       Some e-mail discussion has occurred; question raised about fixName semantics
       and whether or not less than/greater than comparisons can be applied to
       fixName, or just equality tests. Underlying problem is similar to the general
       version problem, which is that different vendors use different methods for fixes
       (as they do for versions), with some having cumulative fixes/fix packs that lend
       themselves to “range” comparison, whereas others don’t.
   Jason believes that the original proposal still has value in accommodating
   additional cases (although not all cases) for specification v1.0 and then revisiting
   overall version/fix topic for v1.1.

   Question raised if the proposal is to “move” fixName from its current location to
   minVersion/maxVersion or to add it to minVersion/maxVersion so that it
   appears in both places. Jason states that original proposal was to move it, but
   current thinking is to have it in both places.

   Those on the call generally agreed that the proposal improves the specification
   and doesn’t hurt anything, noting that this makes fixName more symmetric with
   Version and also could improve the likelihood of backward compatibility if we do
   pursue a more robust approach to this topic in specification v1.1. We also agreed
   to table any decision and continue the discussion (via e-mail and/or at future TC
   calls) to allow Julia and Randy (who have been active participants in the
   discussion thus far) to weigh in further (along with any others who wish to weigh
   in).

4. Remaining work (non-normative documents):

   1. Primer: Brent is about halfway done with the changes agreed to last week.
      Lazar’s changes and Brent’s responses to Julia’s previous comments are
      complete; working on remaining items (including weights and conditions in
      existing examples and adding substitution value explanation). Target new
      version next week.

   2. Starter profile: Jason posted an updated version; only minor updates.

      Motion (Merri) and second (Howard) to open a ballot starting next Monday for
      approval of Starter Profile as a Committee Draft. Motion carries without
      objection. Ballot will stay open for approximately 10 days and permit active
      committee members to vote (see item 2 above).

   3. Example: no actions; examples will be updated appropriately in response to
      any items in Primer or Starter Profile (Randy previously agreed to do these
      updates and has been keeping examples up to date).

   4. Conformance document: Merri posted an updated version; only minor
      updates. Discussion of where to publish this information; Brent confirmed
      that including this in the specification would NOT be a “substantive change”
      per OASIS process.

      Motion (Jason) and second (Merri) to include this information as part of the
      Conformance chapter of the specification (rather than as a separate
      expository document) when the document is approved. Motion carries
      without objection.

      Motion (Merri) and second (Jason) to open a ballot starting next Monday for
      approval of Conformance document as a Committee Draft (to add to
      specification as noted above). Motion carries without objection. Ballot will
      stay open for approximately 10 days and permit active committee members
      to vote (see item 2 above).
5. Old/new business: Brent notes that he will forward any public review comments
   to the TC when they are received, although the public mailing list used for public
   review comments is accessible to anyone via the TC Public Web page.

   Meeting adjourns at 11:30 eastern time.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 02/14/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

0. Elect temporary secretary (Julia will miss this meeting, or at least
be unable to take notes if she can call in)

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from February 7 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)

- Happy Valentine's Day!

3. Public review comments review & disposition (no new PR comments
received as of 7:30 a.m. ET Feb. 13).

4. Remaining work

A. Final Committee Draft for Primer -- review Lazar's changes;
determine plan for final version for publication. Note: example updates
may be required to match updated examples from item 4C.

B. Starter Profile Material -- Determine readiness for review & vote.

C. Example Update -- update examples to match Starter Profile and to
use appropriate URIs; determine readiness and methodology for review &
vote.

D. Conformance Document -- initial review and determine plans for
publication.

5. Old/new business

MINUTES
We do NOT have a quorum, and cannot elect a temporary secretary or approve the
minutes. Robert D. and Brent agree to take notes.

   1. No new public review comments. Tom Studwell to discuss with Randy a comment
      on FixName: change needed to assoc FixName with both Min and Max; for 1.1,
      TC has some work to do on versioning.

   2. Lazar’s updates to Primer: Brent is fine with all of them, and consensus is that
      the approach is correct. Brent suggests incorporating Lazar’s updates (which in
      turn include Brent’s comments, and Julia agrees they’re satisfactory). Suggest
      accepting all of Lazar’s updates and creating a merged document.

       Lazar sent out notes proposing substitution values and existing conditional
       context. The composite example covers conditional content; do we need another
       example? Or just move anything new required information to composite
       example? Idea is to make conditions in composite example more complicated.
   Brent volunteers to take a stab at updating examples in Chapter 5.

   Substitution values: examples don't explain enough about how they work. Lazar
   to forward the e-mail that prompted the question (Ed independently received a
   question about substitution values, too). Brent to produce next revision of
   primer.

3. Starter profile: Jason updated prose document based on Julia’s feedback, but is
   not happy with the wording; added section under 2.1, concerning producers vs.
   consumers, which spells out best practices, but would appreciate review and
   wordsmithing.

   Jason and Julia’s discussions have raised questions about whether things that are
   generic (such as CIM_InstalledProduct) are specific enough for a runtime to
   discover and manage.

   Action is for everyone to review the changes and prepare to discuss issues raised
   by discussion.

4. Conformance document from Merri: supplements explication of conformance
   levels and what’s different between then. Document was inspired by a question
   from the COSMOS team; Merri began by diff-ing schema files and organizing the
   differences.

   There’s some question about whether to keep it a separate expository doc as
   opposed to an appendix or section of the full spec. It’s apparently easier in an
   administrative sense to publish it as a separate doc for 1.0, and we can consider
   integrating as an addition to the spec for 1.1.

5. No further old or new business. Meeting adjourns 20 minutes early.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 02/07/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

0. Elect temporary chair (Brent will most likely miss this meeting)

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from January 31 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Primer approval ballot closed Monday, Feb. 4 -- did not pass with
FULL majority. Need to review Lazar's example proposed changes and
determine any modifications to Primer and, at appropriate time, open
new ballot.

3. Public review comments review & disposition (no new PR comments
received as of noon ET Feb. 5).

4. Remaining work
A. Final Committee Draft for Primer -- review changes resulting from
ballot (including Lazar's proposal); determine plan and vote for final
version for publication.
B. Starter Profile Material -- Determine readiness for review & vote.
C. Example Update -- update examples to match Starter Profile and to
use appropriate URIs; determine readiness and methodology for review &
vote.

5. Old/new business




MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Julia is elected temporary chair.

2. Minutes for 1/31/2007 are approved without comment or objection.

3. Primer –
       a. The vote did not pass – not enough people voted. We had some discussion of
          intent of vote and why it was changed to a full-majority ballot. Some people
          thought the ballot was only for the purpose of collecting comments and
          seeing if everyone thought we were moving in the right direction. Others
          thought the result would be the posting of the primer – which is the thing
          that would cause it to be a Committee Draft by OASIS definitions and need a
          full majority vote. (Although there is even some question on whether that is
          correct – i.e. will the primer ever need to be a CD?)
       b. How will we go forward? Lazar posted updates to one of the chapters to
          illustrate his suggestions. Randy has reviewed Lazar’s updates and likes
          them. He proposes that we modify the primer to be written in the style as
          posted by Lazar. (Lazar wants to know if the optional language packs are for
           the simple client or for the J2EE-Application. Randy will answer off-line.)
           Randy asks if Lazar is willing to complete modifying the document? He says
           OK. (Thank you Lazar!) John also has comments. He prefers to leave the JRE
           as the first in the list. Does not see value add in the building block
           paragraph. There is no definition of building block. Randy agrees that we
           should not introduce the term building block. Lazar does not agree with
           these objections. He thinks the building block concept is important – a
           different term could be used, but the explanation needs to be there. The
           concern about the order may be mitigated when the whole document is
           changed. It needs to be consistent once all the changes are made. Motion
           made again to have Lazar modify the whole document. Seconded. John
           requests that Julia make the modifications, we rework this request to ask that
           Julia plan to review thoroughly and edit as soon as the rework is posted.
           Lazar thinks he can get this rework done by early next week.

4. Profile – Jason posted a new zip file last night with changes to the doc and profile
   schema.
       a. Section 2 of the document has a couple of new paragraphs that talk about
           profile usage. He will rework a little more to talk about the profile extension
           concept in terms of the three choices: 1: Use one or more existing profiles –
           because they define everything you need. 2: Use one or more existing
           profiles that have some of what you need and create a new profile to add
           additional things you need. 3: Create a new profile with the definitions you
           need.
       b. Jason added a statement about interoperability and asks if we are all OK with
           it? No objections are stated – but not everyone has read it yet.
       c. A fictional new profile, abcprofile.xsd, was added to demonstrate profile
           extension.
       d. Discussion of the question raised re: how to represent a requirement on a
           Windows service pack check. Jason and Randy suggest that this can be
           handled by using FixName for service pack. This leads to a debate about
           VersionRangeValue and whether FixName goes with the Range of values or
           with MinVersion/MaxVersion. In the schema, it is associated with range. It
           may need to be associated with Min and Max version instead. Do we need a
           comment for Public Review opened? Julia does not buy the service pack as
           FixName proposal yet and will discuss off-line with Jason.
       e. We think/hope that we can vote on the primer next week.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 01/31/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from January 24 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Primer approval ballot now open (closes Monday, Feb. 4)

3. Public review comments review & disposition [no new comments as of
01/30/2008 8:00 a.m. US eastern time]

4. Remaining work
A. Starter Profile Material -- Determine readiness for review & vote.
B. Example Update -- update examples to match Starter Profile and to
use appropriate URIs; determine readiness and methodology for review &
vote.

5. Old/new business




MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Minutes for 1/24/2008 are approved without objection.

2. Administrative
      a. Reminder that Primer ballot is open and closes next Monday. Lazar posted/e-mailed
         comments; we will add this to today's agenda for discussion if time permits
      b. No new public review comments received.

3. Starter Profile and Primer discussion
       a. Jason will add examples to the doc before next week
                i. extending a profile
               ii. defining a requirement on specific Windows version and service pack
                    level
       b. Determine if the profile needs to be updated based on this example work
           (and make the updates if any are required).

4. SDD Primer discussion
      a. Lazar would prefer to see the primer organized from the perspective of
          someone who is going to create an SDD rather than explaining an existing
          SDD. He will rework one section so we can all look at it and then decide if we
          want to rework the whole document.
      b. The current vote on the primer makes it a Committee Draft. That doesn’t
          prevent us reworking the doc for the next CD. Since there is discussion on
          the table for some serious changes, we can decide not to publish this first
          CD.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 01/24/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval: Meeting Minutes from January 17 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Public review submission status
- Primer approval ballot now open (closes Monday, Feb. 4)
- Updated standard adoption schedule posted

3. Remaining work
A. Starter Profile Material -- "schema" format in place; prose document
to be updated (Jason) [see Jan. 10, Jan. 17 minutes]. Determine
readiness for review & vote.
B. COSMOS SDD runtime effort overview & introduction -- including e-
mail question about use cases (Jason) [10 minutes]

4. Public review comments review & disposition

5. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time


MINUTES
We do not start with a quorum but achieve quorum by 10 after.

1. Minutes for January 17, 2008 are approved without comment or objection.

2. Administrative
      a. The public review began (finally!) on January 18th and will close on March 18th.
         There is one comment already – from a TC member on a minor error in the
         schema files. Also, Merri notes a difference between the CL1 schema and the
         CL2 schema. We want to change CL1 schema. Should this be posted as a
         comment? CL1 is non-normative so no public review comment is needed.
         Brent will clarify with a note on the public page – i.e. state that the CL1
         schema is a subset of the CL2 schema provided for convenience and is non-
         normative. Brent will also find out more about where non-normative docs will
         be posted and see about having the CL1 schema moved.
      b. Primer ballot is open. Please review it (it isn’t very long) and vote. You can
         include comments in your vote. Note that Julia has made a lot of comments
         which can be seen in a marked-up version of the primer posted on the TC
         document page.
      c. The updated standard adoption schedule shows May 1st as the earliest likely
         adoption date.

3. Starter Profile – Jason has posted new version of the primer and xsd files.
       a. Architecture check type was changed to CIM processor.
       b. Values of CIM operating system and processor have been reconciled – i.e.
           values in profile are now identical to names used in CIM.
       c. Jason requests help related to file system values. Randy will check and get
           back to Jason.
       d. TOC is wrong – Jason will update.
       e. Profile class definitions have been moved to an appendix.
       f. Attribute sections were created to consolidate attribute information and
           make the doc easier to follow.
       g. Section 2.1 has a statement about the SDD not governing profiles. Jason asks
           if we want to make recommendations. I.e. give some structure as to how you
           would work with profiles. e.g. Suggest that the first step is to look for
           existing profiles that meet your needs; If not find one to use as a starting
           point and extend it; Last choice is to create your own. If you extend or make
           your own, contribute back to the TC. Will also make recommendation that
           implementations provide extension points so that SDD authors can provide a
           means to deal with resource and artifact types they add to their profile that
           are not supported by the runtime.
       h. The SDD Primer assumes artifacts are defined in profiles. They aren’t there
           now. Should they be? We say yes and Jason will add. We decided on a simple
           enumeration.
   Please review the profile primer now. Get comments to Jason by Tuesday the 29th.
   Jason will get updates to Randy by Wednesday and Randy will update example to
   match. Then we will go over everything next Thursday.

4. COSMOS runtime project overview and update (from Jason). Use case formulation is
   in progress. Work can be seen on the COSMOS wiki. These are high level use cases
   for tools and runtime. Next step will be to open “Enhancement Requests” for
   enhancements to COSMOS for specific use cases. Detailed designs are done under
   the ERs.

5. Merri is working on an appendix that explains more about CL1 and CL2. She would
   like to post it as a separate document now. It cannot be added to the spec until 1.1.
   We would like to include it with the other expository documents, like the primer –
   after the TC has reviewed and approved.

6. Question about potential F2F meetings – so people can plan travel. Are we going to
   wait until we instantiate 1.1 and then schedule a meeting? Do we want a F2F to kick-
   off 1.1? Noted that we had a F2F to kick-off 1.0 – and it happened after 1.0 use
   cases and requirements were done and when there were submissions to review.
   Noted that 1.1 could be used as an opportunity to update the charter. Changing the
   charter requires a re-chartering process which would also be a way to invite others to
   join. Noted that we have a list of items deferred to 1.1. We can pull that out in the
   near future and use it to create use cases for 1.1. Brent will make sure that list is
   posted and notes that it is a partial list.

7. Randy has posted updates to the CL1 and CL2 schema with the minor link problem
   fixed.

8. John notes that an SDD presentation is on the agenda for EclipseCon with question
   marks next to it. Is someone thinking of presenting. Jason will check this out. Brent,
   Randy and Julia have submitted a proposal to the OASIS symposium and have been
   asked to do a tutorial instead of a presentation. We will know by the end of the
   month if this is accepted. The content of this tutorial might be re-used at EclipseCon.
   But EclipseCon is March 17-20, more than a month before the OASIS conference
(April 28 – 5/1). Jason has a conflict and is not a candidate for presenting an
EclipseCon.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 01/17/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval Meeting Minutes from January 10 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Public review submission status

3. Remaining work
A. Starter Profile Material -- "schema" format in place; prose document to be updated
(Jason) [see Jan. 10 minutes]. Determine readiness for review & vote.
B. Primer -- accept John's updates and a few additional updates (Brent) see Jan. 10
minutes]. Determine readiness for review & vote.
C. COSMOS SDD runtime effort overview & introduction -- including e-mail question
about use cases(Jason) [10 minutes]
D. OASIS Symposium -- opportunity for tutorial

4. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time




MINUTES
We do not start with a quorum but achieve quorum by 10 after.

   1. Minutes for 1/10/2008 are approved as posted.

   2. Public review has still not begun. We are at the top of Mary MacRae’s list but she
      is apparently having connection difficulties and is not able to get our documents
      put in the correct location.

   3. Brent posted a primer that is probably ready for review. John completed the
      composite application description. Brent embedded example snippets and did
      some light editing. He also placed snippets in other locations. Brent also
      completed chapter 5 in the document.
      Brent asks if we think the scope of the content is now about right? No comments.
      Please share thoughts on this via email if you think of something. Brent suggest
      we put this up for review now using an electronic ballot and allow comments. We
      can decide that abstain means agreement. Use of the electronic ballot is a way to
      make it easy to everyone’s comments in one place – it is not required for this
      non-normative document.
      The intent is to post this primer with a link on the front page of our public TC
      site. It would not be subject to formal comments.
      Moved, seconded and passed – open an electronic ballot as described.

   4. OASIS symposium is coming up at end of April. Call for papers went out a while
      ago. Randy, Julia and Brent submitted an abstract for an overview paper. The
       symposium committee has asked us to turn that into a tutorial. Has anyone else
       submitted something for the symposium? No response. Does the TC have an
       opinion on delivering a tutorial at the symposium – and is there someone willing
       to assist with that? (Symposium is the week of April 28th in Santa Clara, CA. The
       tutorial would be on the 28th.) Howard is in that area and will possibly attend.
       Randy asks if discussion of the COSMOS work in the tutorial is appropriate and
       useful. Yes, it is appropriate.

   5. COSMOS runtime effort – Jason wanted to give us an overview, but cannot be
      here today. Merri fills in. The runtime group met for several hours at IBM on
      Monday and came up with two sets of use cases – one for tooling and one for
      deployment. Tools are a build time generator and a packaging tool. For
      deployment, the hope is to take the use cases created by the SDD TC and adopt
      those for the runtime. Does anyone have a problem with this? The use cases do
      have company names included – i.e. the company that submitted the use case.
      Note that the use cases are already publicly available on our TC site and it is a
      TC-approved document. It appears that the OASIS copyright allows re-publishing
      and derivitative works from the published documents – which means that there
      would not be a problem. Brent will double check with OASIS. Merri will check on
      the Eclipse side to make sure there is no problem importing this information into
      COSMOS – which is an Eclipse project.

   6. Old/New Business – none. We adjourn early.

Please review the primer, post comments and vote.
Minutes for OASIS SDD TC 01/10/2008 Meeting

AGENDA
11:05 AM ET Roll Call

1. Minutes approval Meeting Minutes from December 13 meeting

2. Administrative (Julia/Brent)
- Public review submission status

3. Remaining work
A. Starter Profile Material -- "schema" format in place, need to update with values
submitted by TC members; prose document to be updated (Jason) [see Dec. 13 minutes]
B. Primer -- initial content posted (Brent); updates posted (John); need review and a few
additional updates to complete

4. Old/new business

** Adjourn 12:00 noon US Eastern Time


MINUTES
We have a quorum.

1. Meeting Minutes from December 13 meeting are approved without comment.

2. Administrative
      a. Public Review status – We submitted everything required from the TC for the
         public review to the OASIS staff on December 13th. The staff has still not
         started the public review. This puts us behind on our schedule by a month.
         There isn’t anything we can do to change this – the public review must be a
         full 60 days. What we can do is try to address comments quickly. Typically
         comments come in at the end of the review period. Minor things can just be
         done by the editors. Substantive issues must be brought up in a TC meeting.
         All comments must be acknowledged – Brent will handle this. All comments
         must be addressed – Brent will send out information as appropriate.
      b. Action items – there are several old action items. We have not been using
         action items. Two are done, others are out-of-date or deferred. We vote to
         close them all.

3. Remaining work
      a. Starter Profile – Jason updated the docs earlier today based on our
         agreements made at our last meeting and has incorporated additional classes
         suggested by individual companies.
         Jason would like some help determining how to wrap up the document. It
         ends abruptly now after the classes are described. Additional information
         could include instructions or examples on how to use profiles. Pointers to
         examples would be good. Also include a discussion, plus examples, of how
         the values in the profiles are used in SDDs. Also include information on how
         to extend profiles.
          Comment – data type and valid value definitions should be separate.
          Comment – there are some valid values that do not match the ones defined
          in CIM. If we are using the same, or a subset of CIM, we should use the same
          values. Jason will stick to using the family types from CIM and put a note in
          the document about the correspondence with CIM values.
          Comment – CIM models objects, not just resources. It makes for a bit of a
          mismatch. Randy and Jason will talk more about this off-line.
          Comment – Refer to the SDD primer.

          Please get any additional suggestions for additional classes to Jason ASAP.

          Once Jason tells us this is ready for review, the review process will be similar
          to what we’ve done for the specification. Even though this is not normative, it
          is informative and public and we’ll take a vote on it after the review.

      b. SDD Primer – John posted an update that included his action item to provide
         text explaining the composite example. (Noted: “quite good”).
         John notes that some examples will need to change to match the final starter
         profile.
         Do we want to embed example files (attach) or inline them? We have both in
         the doc. Noted that it is easier to maintain if they are linked, but much easier
         to read and understand if they are inline. Another option is to put them in an
         appendix. Also, snippets could be inlined instead of full examples. Snippets
         could be combined with appendix or attachment or pointer to example files
         in appendix. Specification uses inline snippets combined with an appendix
         containing a link. We like this last suggestion best.
         Brent will take the pen now for the primer and change the examples and fill
         in content for chapter 5.
         Everyone – please review John’s changes (THIS WEEK) – or the whole thing if
         you haven’t reviewed yet.
         Is there more work after Brent makes changes? Brent might call on
         individuals for help with chapter 5. We should be ready for a review in one or
         two more rounds of editing.

4. New/old business:
      a. New work item. Examples need to be updated. Randy says he’ll do it once we
         finalize the starter profile.
         Also, Randy asks that people review the examples (THIS WEEK) and look for
         things that are maybe not quite how we would like to do things and suggest
         updates.
      b. John suggests that Jason walk us through the COSMOS work on our next call.
         Jason notes that subscribing to cosmos-dev can be useful. Also, there is a
         recurring call on Tuesdays at 9am. Progress can be monitored by attending
         the meeting or following the work on the wiki. Now is the time to start
         participating if you intend to participate at all.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:5
posted:9/29/2011
language:English
pages:66