Minutes of SWSA Telecon of November 25, 2003 Attendees: Mike Dean, Mike Huhns, Chris Bussler, Michal Zaremba, Mark Burstein, Massimo Paolucci, Stuart Williams, Carole Goble Stuart: Thinking through the checkout basket model for a use case (see email) Supplier might lose business - due to competition - but small suppliers might want to lock in by having proprietary technology. Themes of late binding, notification. Client might provide a notification interface and a reception port for those messages. (e.g. like email address for purchase confirmation) MB: As opposed to model where supplier provides the notification interface for their process model. SW: This might be more prevalent in the B2B environment. One might imagine popular public ontologies of such events. CG: We are doing case study work on our EU project on supply chain protocols. Grounded in RosettaNet type protocols. SW: Internally we are collecting all the messaging specs we use. There is so much flexibility in the protocols, there grows up idiomatic style around each. There are 100s of pages written around a e.g. a PO request. Application guide on RosettaNet PIP3A4 - 44 pages. - element level data definition - cardinality, type, max length - detailed mapping to internal fields - use case - transformation logic to used by others to map to PIP model MB: Interesting to dig into how much can be done declaratively, where the agents will get the ontologies. SW: Second scenario is relationship with suppliers. Getting stuff shipped, payments made. Use of multiple warehouses or shipping from wholesalers. - Trying to organize a chain of events. Shipping logistics may be pushed off to global delivery or build up local suppliers/warehouses. Late binding theme again. Major and Minor workflows - Minor workflows are really protocols? CG:Push down things to do with failure as opposed to the goal level interactions SW: Shared abstractions help HTTP means asynch 200 doesn't mean process kicked off correctly, just that msg received. Including everything means you end up with large datagrams Better if we can assume synchrony is part of underlying model. WS-Reliability http://otn.oracle.com/tech/webservices/htdocs/spec/WS-ReliabilityV1.0.pdf WS-Transaction WS-* Massimo: Took list of SWS functions - how would they be implemented in the amazon web service. Reqs: Language for Advertising and Matchmaking Need: purpose of the service? Not sure if same as effects. SW: Problem is how to establish what the starting state is. If Amazon knows who I am - I have a trading history - then can see the service interactions as episodes in one ongoing conversation. Different time epochs/lifecycles involved. MP: contracting and negotiation - some contracts may last for a long time. you give cc to Amazon, stores it for a long time. contract about book sale expires, but contract about privacy of cc lasts longer. MP: So abstraction from problem - goal to buy book 'war and peace' how do we go from predicates to coresponding request?