[cddlm] deploy API revisions

[Hiro Kishimoto]

Hi Dejan and Steve,

Yes, Steve's changes are fine by me.

Thanks,
----
Hiro Kishimoto

Milojicic, Dejan S (HP Labs) wrote:
> Thanks Steve,
> 
> I will submit it as is (others, please note that PDF does not correspond
> to the Word document, read the Word document instead). 
> 
> Hiro, I hope that the changes are fine with you and that it is ok that I
> submit it.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dejan.
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-cddlm-wg at ggf.org [mailto:owner-cddlm-wg at ggf.org] 
>>On Behalf Of Steve Loughran
>>Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 5:24 AM
>>Cc: cddlm-wg at ggf.org
>>Subject: Re: [cddlm] deploy API revisions
>>
>>
>>This is the updated document. As usual, the CVS image of this 
>>is the normative copy of the specification; what you are 
>>seeing here is are downstream artifacts of that gold image.
>>
>>I've made less changes than hiro suggested, not because I 
>>dont agree with them, but because I dont think the changes 
>>should go through except in co-ordination with the other 
>>specifications. If we can do this, then yes, I am in favour 
>>of the changes.
>>
>>A1, A2. Yes, there is duplication in the introductory commentary. 
>>However, the team agreed to put a consistent preamble across 
>>all the standards. I do not want to change mine to be 
>>inconsistent, unless we change all simulataneously. 
>>Accordingly, I have not applied any changes to that part of 
>>the document.
>>
>>A2:
>>Looking at the engineering costs of this I'm more reluctant 
>>to make an immediate change. I'd have to change the schema 
>>information across all docs including test documents, and it 
>>will be inconsistency across the different specs. We can do 
>>it, but it will require team-wide coordination.
>>
>>An extra complexity is that GFD.58 doesnt define where other 
>>URIs should go, for example, MUWS capabilities. I have picked 
>>on 
>>http://www.gridforum.org/cddlm/deployapi/2005/02/capabilities/
>>portal for one of these. Similarly, Appendix B defines two
>>
>>What I have done is declared in section 4.4.3.3 that all 
>>extra deployment options that begin with 
>>http://ggf.org/schemas/cddlm are reserved for the cddlm wg.
>>
>>
>>A3. Declared which chapters are normative vs informative.
>>
>>A5:. removed "Compliant" near OGSA.
>>
>>A6: marked the XSD as copyright 2004-2006. It didnt exist until 2004.
>>
>>
>>Again, these are all minor changes. They make no changes to 
>>the semantics of any part of the specification.
>>
>>Dejan, Stuart, if you are happy with these, then post them to 
>>the site. 
>>I am now going to be absent for eight days, skiing in the 
>>Alps. No email, no voicemail.
>>
>>-steve
>>
>>-Steve
>>
> 
> 
> 
>