Minutes of the conference call on 2005/11/15
Minutes of OASIS WSQM TC conference call
The 2nd conference call of the OASIS Web Services Quality Model (WSQM) TC was held on Wednesday, November 9, 2005 from 0700 GMT to 0830 GMT.
Jiyong agreed to take the minutes.
1 Roll Call
Welcoming Remark by Prof. Min
Prof. Min asked Jiyong to check the attendance.
Last Name / First Name / Company / Role / AttendedKim / Yeong-Ho / Daewoo Information / Voting Member / ¨
Kerrigan / Mr. Mick / Digital Enterprise Research Institute / Observer / ¨
Zaremba / Dr. Michal / Digital Enterprise Research Institute / Voting Member / ¨
Jeon / Jong Hong / Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute / Observer / ¨
Moon / Ki Young / Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute / Voting Member / ¨
Spyridopoulos / John / Glintech / Voting Member / þ
Lee / Youngkon / Individual / Voting Member / þ
Min / Dugki / Individual / Voting Member / þ
Jung / Hyun / Korean National Computerization Association / Observer / ¨
Kim / Dr. Eunju / Korean National Computerization Association / TC Convener / þ
Lee / Ho Kyoung / Korean National Computerization Association / Voting Member / þ
Oh / Hyun-Mok / Korean National Computerization Association / Voting Member / þ
Pyon / Jiyong / Korean National Computerization Association / Voting Member / þ
Choi / Jungkuk / Methodi inc / Voting Member / þ
Kwon / SoonJae / Methodi inc / Voting Member / ¨
Clark / James Bryce / OASIS / OASIS Staff Contact / ¨
Cover / Robin / OASIS / Observer / ¨
Shin / Soocheol / Samsung SDS Co., Ltd. / Voting Member / þ
Tan / Puay Siew / Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology / Observer / ¨
9 of 13 voting members are present, hence meeting is Quorate.
Jiyong stated that Yeong-Ho Kim had notified him in advance that he would not be able to attend the meeting due to the project that he was working on.
Jiyong stated that Mr. Mick Kerrigan and Dr. Michal Zaremba would be busy with their Semantic Web Conference at DERI.
Mr. Jaeseung Lee stated that He was present instead of Ki Young Moon.
Jiyong called out Mr. John Spyridopoulos’ name and confirmed the pronunciation of his last name.
Jiyong asked Mr. John Spyridopoulos’ permission to call him casually as John and he agreed.
Jiyong stated that Mr. Jaeseung Lee was attending the meeting on the behalf of Ki Yong Moon.
Jiyong stated that there is a guest from LG CNS, Mr. Moojung Ahn.
Mr. Moojung Ahn briefly introduced about himself. He stated that he was in charge of Web Service and SOA in LG CNS.
Jiyong stated that thiere is another guest from NCA, Mr. Sungshin Hong.
Mr. Sungshin Hong briefly introduced about himself.
Jiyong stated that there were not members of WSQM TC yet but there were prospective members.
Prof. Min asked if they were in process of becoming members of WSQM TC.
Mr. Moojung Ahn stated that he was in the registration process and he would officially be a member of WSQM TC sooner or later.
Prof. Mind asked Jiyong that how many members were present.
Jiyong announced that there were 9 voting members out of 13 voting members, thus the meeting was quorate.
Dr. Eunju Kim stated that John couldn’t connect in last conference call.
John stated that he was indeed not able to connect due to the technical problem.
Dr. Eunju Kim suggested John to introduce himself.
John stated that he is a senior consultant of Glintech in Sydney. In addition, He also stated about his objective in this collaborative effort of WSQM, his special plan on research of SOA with Ph D. students and his own agenda to get Ph. D next year.
Prof. Min asked John if Glintech is a consulting company.
John stated Glintech is a consulting organization focused on enterprise application integration, J2EE development and .Net development.
2 Review and approval of the agenda
Agenda of the 20051109 conference call:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsqm/event.php?event_id=8828
Prof. Min asked John if he checked the agenda.
John stated that he checked the agenda in advance.
Prof. Min reminded each items in agenda.
Prof. Min asked if there are any other items that need to be discussed.
Dr. Kim stated that there is none.
Jiyong asked if there is any objection
Prof. Min stated that there is no objection.
The agenda was approved.
3 Approval of the 2005/10/12 meeting minutes
The minutes of the 20051012 conference call:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsqm/download.php/15051/Minutes%20of%201st%20Conference%20Call%20on%2020051012.doc
Jiyong stated that he would assume that everyone in TC had reviewed the minutes in advance since it was distributed and announced earlier.
Jiyong pronounced each item from minutes of the last conference call.
Prof. Min asked if there are any missing parts or corrections to be made.
Dr. Kim stated that there is none.
No objections, thus the minutes of the last conference call was approved.
4 Review and approval of the charter
The charter:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsqm/download.php/15195/WSQM-TC-Charter-0912.doc
Prof. Min asked when the charter has been written.
Dr. Kim stated that she was not sure of the exact date of the charter written.
Prof. Min stated that the charter has been revised several times with Jamie since its first draft. And asked when the charter was finally updated.
Jiyong stated that the charter was finally updated on September 12, 2005.
Prof. Min stated that the two versions of charters had been distributed, old and new version.
Dr. Kim added that the old version was published with Jamie for the call for participation of 1st conference call, and new version had been updated since. And there was a minor change between them.
Prof. Min asked John if he had both versions of the charter.
John stated that he had new version from web site.
Jiyong stated that the changes between old version and new version were minor changes which in most cases had been editorial clean-ups.
Prof. Min stated that he would review the charter item by item.
No corrections to be made in part a of the charter
Prof. Min stated that there had been changes in part b for more clear meaning of the statement.
Prof. Lee stated he was ok with it since it was small change.
John stated he was ok with it.
No corrections to be made in part b of the charter
Jiyong pointed out that in part c of the charter, Web Services Quality Test Model (WSQTM) had been changed to Web Services Quality Test Guideline in new version.
Dr. Kim also pointed out that Web Services Test Guideline was indicated as an option in part c while it is in a list of deliverables in part d and suggested to discuss about it.
Prof. Min suggested Web Services Test Guideline to be one of the deliverables since TC have more time than they thought they initially had for making Web Services Test Guideline, and therefore remove ‘if possible’ in the sentence.
Prof. Min asked John for his opinion.
John confirmed and agreed.
Prof. Min asked Jiyong to correct the charter accordingly.
Prof. Min expressed his gratitude to Dr. Kim for her suggestion
No more corrections to be made in part c.
Prof. Min asked if the order of the deliverables in the part d of the charter was suitable.
Prof. Min stated that he estimated the TC would be able to finish the first deliverable ‘Web Services Quality Model (WSQM)’ within a year (by October in 2006).
Prof. Min asked opinions about the completion date of Web Services Quality Description Language (WS-QDL).
Dr. Kim stated that it is possible to finish WS-QDL according to the schedule since enough time is given to TC.
Prof. Min suggested to switch the order between WS-QDL and Web Services Test Guideline.
Prof. Lee suggested to put WSQM and WS-QDL together since they were strongly relevant each other and place them in parallel to Web Service Test Guideline.
John asked if the schedule has been reduced from 2 years to 18 months.
Dr. Kim asked for Prof. Lee’s confirmation.
Dr. Lee stated that WSQM TC would be able to finish the whole standard work within 18 months.
Dr. Kim projected that the completion date of WSQM standard work would be June, 2007 according to Dr. Lee’s suggestion.
Mr. Moojung Ahn suggested working on both WSQM and WS Quality Test Guideline simultaneously.
Prof. Min stated that 1 year for both WSQM and WS Quality Test Guideline might be too short since there is more work needed to be done for WS Quality Test Guideline. Prof. Min also stated that he agreed with idea to develop WSQM and WS-Quality Test Guideline at the same time but the completion date for WS Quality Test Guideline must be 18 months or 2 years from formation of TC.
Prof. Lee stated that WSQM and WS Quality Test Guideline are bonded tightly each other. He suggested starting WS Quality Test Guideline 6 months after starting WSQM so TC can adjust the completion date for the whole project.
Dr. Kim restated Prof. Lee’s suggestion and asked his confirmation.
Prof. Min stated that TC would complete WSQM by November in 2005 and complete WS-QDL and WS Quality Test Guideline together by November in 2006.
Dr. Kim confirmed that TC would complete WSQM within a year and also complete WS-QDL and WS Quality Test Guideline together within a year.
Prof. Lee stated that TC might need more time for WS-QDL and WS Quality Test Guideline because WS-QDL required much more time than TC might think.
Prof. Lee stated that 1 year is adequate for the completion of WS Quality Test Guideline.
Prof. Min stated that TC standard draft for WS-Quality Test Guideline is changing as the work of TC progresses; hence TC would need enough time for the completion of WS-Quality Test Guideline.
Dr. Kim summarized that WS-QDL and WS Quality Test Guideline would be placed in parallel in terms of priority, and WS-QDL would be completed within 6 months after the completion of the WSQM, and WS Quality Test Guideline would be completed within 1 year after the completion of the WSQM.
Dr. Kim asked if everyone agreed
Sungshin agreed with Dr. Kim and asked if total period of time for the entire work is 2 years.
Dr. Kim and Prof. Min confirmed that it is 2 years.
John restated the outcome of the discussion and agreed with it.
Prof. Min asked if there were any other suggestions.
No other suggestions and No more corrections to be made in part d
Prof. Min stated about the part e of the charter.
No objections and no corrections to be made in part e
Prof. Min stated about the part f of the charter.
No objections and no corrections to be made in part f
Prof. Min stated about the part g of the charter.
No objections and no corrections to be made in part g
Prof. Min asked if TC had to consider the part below the dotted line in the charter.
Jiyong stated that those were just information for the WSQM 1st conference call
Prof. Min stated the summary of discussion on the charter review.
Prof. Min asked if there are any objections.
Prof. Min asked if the voting is needed.
Jiyong stated that the voting is not necessary unless TC members want. As Jamie said in the last conference call, it is acceptable to use simple method like checking if there are any objections and then approve in case of no objection.
No objection, thus the charter was approved.
5. Contributed work
Prof. Min stated that there are two contributes works which are Web Services Quality Model and Web Service Quality Test Guideline both for Korean government. Prof. Min suggested to consider only WSQM at this moment since WS Quality Test Guideline will be commenced a year later.
Prof. Min asked if there are any issues to discuss on WSQM.
Dr. Kim stated that the initial draft of WAQM (v 1.0) was submitted and WSQM v 2.0 which TC is currently working on would be released in Korean version by the end of November 2005. And it will be translated into English next month and submitted by middle of next month.
Dr. Kim suggested that TC started reviewing WSQM v 2.0
Prof. Min restated suggestion from Dr. Kim that the first deliverable of WSQM TC would be based on the contributed work developed by NCA.
Dr. Kim suggested that TC might be able to start reviewing WSQM v 1.0 since the change is not substantial and start reviewing WSQM v2.0 in the next conference call.
Prof. Min asked John if he had read the WSQM document.
John replied that he had not thoroughly read the WSQM document yet and asked that if TC was discussing about WSQM ver 0.3.
Prof. Min asked Dr. Kim that she meant ver 0.3.
Dr. Kim confirmed that she meant ver 0.3.
Prof. Min suggested to review the revised version in the next conference call after it was released in next month.
John asked when the English version would be ready.
Dr. Kim replied that English version would be ready before the next conference call
Dr. Kim suggested to discuss the definition of Web Services Quality and any other related issue in the conference call
Prof. Min asked John if he had conducted any research on Web Service Quality.
John replied that he had been working with UDDI registry vendor on WS Quality metrics applying on WS policy.
Prof. Min asked John if he knew how many quality metrics they have.
John replied that he did not know how many quality metrics they have. He stated that he was also interest to see Web Services Quality Model in terms of business service value.