Versions Compared

Version Old Version 7 New Version Current
Changes made by

WILSON Scott

WILSON Scott

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Agenda 

Item

Time
Welcome1400

Update on tasks


Any other business


Close1530
Panel
borderColorlightgrey

Table of Contents
maxLevel2


Welcome

Objectives of this meeting are:

  • work on tasks

Update on tasks

Completed tasks

Task

Notes
Support
FAQQuestion and answer on HTTP Error codes was moved to the supporting material
SWIM service ecosystem
Service CategoriesThe categories reviewed at the previous meeting were moved to the reference website

Ongoing tasks

Continue work.
TaskNotes
Artefacts to describe services
Service Definitions supporting material
  • No updates required.
Service Descriptions supporting material
  • Comments to be resolved (if you have ideas please send them to the group):
    • SWIM-SERV-240 Service interfaces - If the fully qualified network address is not provided for e.g. security reasons, what text should be used?
      • Note that GML has the following enumeration which
      might be inspiration
      • was used for inspiration in the current example:
        • "inapplicable": there is no value
        • "missing": the correct value is not readily available to the sender of this data. Furthermore, a correct value may not exist
        • "template": the value will be available later
        • "unknown": the correct value is not known to, and not computable by, the sender of this data. However, a correct value probably exists
        • "withheld": the value is not divulged
      • Concerns were raised about the ability to withhold the network address - if a service is not reachable, should it be in the registry at all?
        • It was pointed out that the example is for service descriptions in general.
        • The representation in the registry is another concern. The registry is a design time registry, not a run time registry. The registry CCB should be asked if it is possible to have authenticated and non-authenticated users. That would allow certain fields to be only seen by authenticated users. Non-authenticated users could see something like the /wiki/spaces/BOK/pages/59409601 fields only.
      • The example will remain as it is for the moment until the registry CCB gets back with an answer.
Support
Conformance/compliance assessment report templates
  • Decide if we want to It was decided that we will not engage in preparing templates like this for now.
    • See 2022-09-26-SSCONE-SITCOM for the example templates.
    • The assessment_template_introduction.pptx was used to introduce the topic.
    • It was pointed out that it is possible to use a local PKI that conforms with the European PKI. The compliance template has the word "use". It should be updated to "use of complies with".
    • The NM B2B SWIM compliance documentation is available on their OST for those with access.
  • The group discussed how to better document the fact that interoperability is the goal of the SWIM activities.
    • The fact that a service implementation:
      • try to conform with existing service definitions and
      • try to use standardised implementation based on the SWIM TIYP help with this.
    • The domains and other communities create the service definitions (see e.g. https://ext.eurocontrol.int/swim_confluence/display/ASW/Aeronautical+SWIM+Services). Much of the interoperability discussions happens in those groups.
    • However, some good documentation on the need for interoperability is still needed. We can discuss this further at the next meeting.
FAQ
  • Questions to be answered (if you have ideas please send them to the group):
    • How do I describe a service that uses GraphQL?
SWIM service ecosystem
Documenting the use of standardised implementations
  • Continue work
Service Categories - Service Type

  • The group will review the content and provide further examples before the next meeting.

  • We can decide it the work can be completed at the next meeting.

/wiki/spaces/SCOI/pages/59606413
  • Dedicated meetings on this. Next one is 28th November.
Service Portfolio and Service Categories - Service Type
  • Open request:
    • provide examples of the typical exchanges that can be mapped to a given category e.g. what falls under “Capacity, demand and flow information”.
    • Hopefully the work on service categories will help answer this.

Any other business

  • Registry.

    • New schema version is still in test.

Next meetings

Meeting schedule is maintained at SSCONE-SITCOM Meetings. 

Next progress meeting is 19December 2022.