Meetings/Telecon2014.09.23

Event details

• https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/oslc-automation/event.php?event_id=37955 Chat room: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/oslc-automation

Agenda

• Roll Call
• Look for volunteer for note taker/scribe
• Review minutes of previous meeting
• Approval of last meeting's minutes

• OSLC Automation applied to systems/hardware - Uri & Bill

• OSLC Architecture Management "Long-running MDD transformations" scenario - Steve Speicher

• Any other business
• Adjourn

Resolutions

Minutes

Chair

Martin Pain

Scribe

Martin Pain

Attendees

Martin Pain (IBM), Steve Speicher (IBM), Uri Shani (IBM)

Regrets

John Arwe

anonymous morphed into Steve Speicher (IBM)

Martin Pain (IBM): Agenda: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-automation/Meetings/Telecon2014.09.23

Martin Pain (IBM): Action on Martin: Make sure chat room URL is available in the right places

Martin Pain (IBM): Attending:

• Martin Pain (IBM) Steve Speicher (IBM) uri shani (IBM)

Martin Pain (IBM): Scribe: Martin

Review of minutes

Martin Pain (IBM): review of previous minutes: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-automation/Meetings/Telecon2014.08.26

Martin Pain (IBM): Motion: Approval of minutes

Martin Pain (IBM): SS: No problems

Martin Pain (IBM): US: No problem

Martin Pain (IBM): Minutes approved

Automation in systems engineering

Uri Shani shared 3 scenarios of (opportunities for) Automation integration in systems engineering.

Scenario 1:

Monitors (running on simulators) monitoring physical devices or other simulators. Setting up these experiments (with many components) and collecting the results is common in Systems Engineering.

The tools, devices & models may be dispersed across international borders, and connected together in the same experiment across the Internet.

Scenario 2:

Semantic Mediation Container storing system requirements, design model, test model, test scripts, & test results - generated & consumed by different tools used by different people/teams in different locations.

Scenario 2 doesn't look like it poses any problems for standard generic Automation 2.0

Scenario 3: Systems of Systems

Takes in a System of Systems UPDM SysML model, identifies an optimisation measure, involves manual intervention to look at variant possibilities, executes the architecture and outputs a new SoS UPDM model.

What next? Many things can use generic OSLC Automation. 1st scenario is the most complex. If designing the plan it can be done entirely behind the interface in one tool, it's standard OSLC Automation. If that plan design wants to be loosely-coupled, this might be more like the composition use case which has been brought up before but didn't get anywhere, or no work was deemed necessary.

Meeting adjourned

Original Chat transcript from room: oslc-automation

Membership changes

At the end of this meeting:

• Members who lost voting rights:

  • None

  • Name (Org) group role has been changed to Member

• Members who gained voting rights:

  • None
• Leave of Absence
  • None
• Membership changes
  • None

  • Name (org) has left the TC

• TC summary
  • The TC has X voting members, Y non-voting members, and Z observers.

• The latest TC roster is at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/oslc-automation/members/roster.php

Next meeting:

• Members who will lose voting rights if they do not attend:

  • Name (Org)

• Members who will gain voting rights if they attend:

  • Name (Org)

(See OASIS TC Process - Membership and participation - Voting member)