Date: 16.05.2012 Time: 15:00 CEST Duration: 1 hr Participants: JP Navarro Shiraz Memon David Meredith Balazs Konya Etienne Urbah Florido Paganelli John Casson Stephen Burke JP: What are the benefits for using substitution groups? David: Context and benefits of having substitution groups in GLUE XSD. The requirements of such are derived from GOCDB information system. Advantage of having abstract endpoint and service to define our own new specialized services and endpoints and take advantage of highly constrained schema. This can be a base profile for the glue2.The proliferation of new service and endpoint types would not raise concern as this can be defined in a new profile. Therefore a new profiled schema could extend the original glue2 schema inheriting the abstract service and endpoint types. The new schema with examples demonstrating the aforesaid changes can be downloaded from: http://tools.ngs.ac.uk/ngstools/glue2proposal/src.zip JP: What other elements besides Service and Endpoint could be considered for the substitution groups? Shiraz: Not that we require Florido: Me neither, perhaps Manager or Computing Manager, might be the new elements may pop-up once the schema is in production Stephen: People may want to extend any of the core classes Balazs: problem that everytime you want to extend an element we will need to introduce schema change, therefore every core element should be included JP: possible candidate entities could be Administrative domains, as it is quite broad concept and could be used outside the glue context and people may want to extend it into other applications JP: we continue to discuss this in our next call, whether all the core classes can be included eventually? We have three options: either we vote on these two elements that are proposed or we could adapt all the core classes? Shiraz: it is reasonable to have all the major core classes Florido: the idea is to avoid another schema change Shiraz: the number of core classes should be limited in order to avoid introducing the unnecessary complexity ACTION - Florido and David will give a proposal containing the core classes requiring substitution groups and that will be discussed in the next meeting JP: The proposal will be discussed in next call - there will be document changes. Can those document changes be worked on while we are still working on the proposal or we have to wait until the proposal is finalised? Shiraz: The rendering document should be worked on side by side Balazs: there is NO official rendering document, that is the big issue JP: suggestion would be to continue with the changes in it and ready by OGF, is this reasonable? Shiraz: the xml rendering document should be ready for discussion by the next OGF Balazs: i'd like to see the xml rendering document to be planned for public coment submission containing David's proposal JP: does it require any changes in the spec. too? David: No, in spec. it only suggests that you should derive sub-type specializations which is only relevant for specific rendering ACTION - David will provide the xml rendering document in two weeks (by next phone meeting) JP: by next meeting we should be ready with the draft to be circulated for the public comment and we close the public comment by OGF, is it too aggressive? or people see urgency of having this document? Balazs: i'd like to avoid further delays with the renderings JP: We can have draft by the meeting for internal comments JP: There are two XML renderings out there: teragrid/xsede and the global one. What are the characterizations and differences ACTION - JP: I will talk to Warren by the meeting in two weeks Shiraz: The xsede project is using private and public schema, while using their own flavor of glue2 schema. However I have created two (public and private) example instances using the Globalized schema. JP: I expect to adopt the globalized schema, one reason that we have used glue2 "global" element with everything under as sub.elements. This can be a non-issue as this is implementation specific and globalized schema provides entities that could be wrapped into another schema under some global element. JP: What are the benefits of having global elements? Shiraz: both public and private xml instances can be created by only re-using the specific global elements David: One of the benefits of global elements is to compose and re-use in third party schemas, and doing the substitution groups make most of the elements global JP: one could compose two valid public and private, however I will engage with Warren and discuss the changes JP: EGI has been trying to standardise the service names and types David: It was an informal agreement containing the suggestions defining the consistent enumeration Florido: collect the names and create a consistent directory for someone referring to specific service Balazs: the plan was that EGI-EMI-Globus prepares a proposal for enumerationsd and it gets submitted to OGF glue group then after agreement gets uploaded to an OGF-GLUE-wiki Florido: It is not only limited to service name or type enumerations but all the open enumerations in the schema. And the the activity is independent from xml schema JP: The people may enumerate same service with different names, having profiles can enable interoperability while classifying the services in a unified way Shiraz, Stephen: All the enumerations should be collected on gridforge wiki Florido: They are being collected on google docs, will be posted on wiki after agreements JP: I would support glue2 names and types profile document John, Shiraz: Having a document requires lot of effort, thus wiki page is more suitable for collecting the enumerations JP: If wiki then what is the process of updating the wiki page? Stephen: the main point is to record the types in use so everyone knows what they mean... Florido: In the short term the wiki is sufficient, but in the long term I agree the services being published provide their profiles in a separate document. The collected enumerations will be forwarded to the ogf group. ACTION - Florido will send a link to the glue2 wiki page containing a link to the google docs Balazs: in Lund we are reviwing the ldap rendering draft ACTION - Balazs plan to send a commented ldap document later this week JP: OGF35 announcement, room information, and next phone meeting Etienne: I will re-send an email concerning the proposals of extending the activity entity