Start page CM001 Spec Maintenance Toulouse, France October 6, 2003 Bill McDonald, Alteon - CMI Subcommittee Chair October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France 16

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance Overview CMI001 Spec Maintenance/Rewrite Background Purpose Ground rules Plan/Status Current Draft Issues (& Discussion) Document walk-thru (& Discussion) October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 - Spec Maintenance Background (Need) CMI001 has known issues Document Structure confusing Errors and Omissions Ambiguous definitions CMI001 (HACP and file-based) specs are still in wide use many are still depending on it. Some AICC data elements have been “slashed-n-burned” out of related specs from ADL, LTSC. Obviously, no other organization is going to support this effort. October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance Purpose “Disambiguate” Clarify Ambiguities Narrow Definitions Make explanations more concise Fix Errors and Omissions Remove conflicting statements “Clean house” Eliminate Duplication Reorganize Preserve existing features in use today and identify features for deprecation/removal October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance Ground Rules No new features (this is a maintenance release) . New features/functional changes may be considered for later releases as deemed necessary. When resolving spec error/ambiguities : Consider existing practice (existing implementations). Consider difficulty/practicality of implementation In short, please consider the “stake holders” Suggestions for changes will be requested “in writing” (to facilitate editing). October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance Revised Plan/Status Initial effort proposed [Vienna - June 2002] Preliminary document discussed [Montreal - Sept 2002] Partial Draft Review – [Miami - Feb 2003] Initial Draft Complete – [March 2003 ] Second Review - [Minneapolis - June, 2003] Third Review – [Toulouse – Oct 2003] Final Review/Approval – [ Feb 2004 or June 2004 ] ? Draft Testing Document – [ June 2004 ] New Test Suite Prototype – [ June 2004 ] October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

“Working Draft 10” Status CMI001 Spec Maintenance “Working Draft 10” Status Overview - [Drafted] Communications Data Model - [Drafted] Course Structure Data Model - [Drafted] AU Sequencing in Course - [Drafted] File-based Communication Binding - [Drafted] HACP Binding - [Drafted] API Binding - [Drafted] Course Structure (Files) Definition - [Drafted] Data Types - [Drafted] BNF (Backus-Naur Form) Notation - [Drafted] Glossary - [In progress] October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

Minneapolis Meeting (recap) CMI001 Spec Maintenance Minneapolis Meeting (recap) Work conflicts prevented my attendance, so an ad-hoc review was led by Jack (thanks Jack!). Communication Data Model reviewed up to section 2.7.3 in the meeting. API binding reviewed (Section 6.6) Most of this input is now in “Working Draft 10” October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance CMI001v4 Draft - Issues Objectives_Status vs. PutObjectives Completion Requirements (Rules Firing order) Comprehensive input/output cross-reference tables. Issues with some of the Minneapolis Meeting inputs. October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

Objectives_Status vs. PutObjectives CMI001 Spec Maintenance Objectives_Status vs. PutObjectives (Note) This question should not affect the API Does PutObjectives (Objectives status file) method update status/time for objectives in later AU sessions (like the [Objectives_Status] group ? Are both “output” methods equivalent? Which has precedence if both are used? There are good arguments for and against. Current draft takes the “they are different” approach with regards to updates – this can be easily reversed October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

Completion Requirements Rules CMI001 Spec Maintenance Completion Requirements Rules (Note) Affects interpretation of course structure Order of rules execution, when status is updated, rules precedence, etc are not fully explained. A draft “single pass” definition for rules interpretation is in 4.3.2 October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

Minneapolis Meeting draft inputs. CMI001 Spec Maintenance Minneapolis Meeting draft inputs. Some edits conflict with current practice, test suite, and last version October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance END October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance BNF Primer Construct = Rule Definitions < verbal definition of a rule >  Literal : "literal" Logical “or” : rule1 | rule2 grouping : (rule1 rule2) optional : [rule] Repeat zero or more times : *rule Repeat N times : N rule Repeat x to y times: x*y rule Comments : ; comment October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance BNF Example BNF: CSV_FORMAT = CSV_HEADER *CSV_RECORD Description: CSV_FORMAT begins with a CSV_HEADER followed by zero or more occurrences of CSV_RECORD October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France CMI001 Spec Maintenance ; LWS, HEADER_NAME, CRLF, CSV_ELEMENT are defined in earlier rules ; Comma separated field name list – i.e. “the header row” CSV_HEADER = ( LWS HEADER_NAME LWS *( "," LWS HEADER_NAME LWS ) ) CRLF ; Comma separated list with leading/training linear white space – “a record” CSV_RECORD = ( LWS CSV_ELEMENT LWS *( "," LWS CSV_ELEMENT LWS ) ) CRLF    ; AICC Comma Separated Values (CSV) Format definition CSV_FORMAT = CSV_HEADER *CSV_RECORD October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

New Document “Walk-Thru” CMI001 Spec Maintenance New Document “Walk-Thru” Review: Overview of Structure Data Model Tables (multi-binding) Datatypes/BNF Common Binding Organization Examples Discussion October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

Miami Meeting - Plan/Status CMI001 Spec Maintenance Miami Meeting - Plan/Status Initial effort proposed [Vienna - June 2002] Preliminary document discussed [Montreal - Sept 2002] Initial Draft Review – [Miami - Feb 2003] Incomplete Review period (online) - [Feb thru June, 2003] Start Conformance-Testing Design work [May 2003] Final Review - [Minneapolis - June, 2003] Conformance Testing Document - [Minneapolis - June, 2003] Test Suite Prototype - [Toulouse - Sept, 2003] ?? October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France

Miami Meeting - Draft Status (“stop lights”) CMI001 Spec Maintenance Miami Meeting - Draft Status (“stop lights”) Overview - [Not Started] Communications Data Model - [Done] Course Structure Data Model - [Done] AU Sequencing in Course - [In progress 60%] File-based Communication Binding - [Done] HACP Binding - [In progress 80%] API Binding - [Done] Course Structure (Files) Definition - [In progress 60%] Data Types - [Done] BNF (Backus-Naur Form) Notation - [Done] Glossary - [Not Started] October 6, 2003 CMI Subcommittee - Toulouse, France