[DRMAA-WG] DRMAA conformance rules

[Rajic, Hrabri]

No reference to a compliance test suite?

Hrabri

>-----Original Message-----
>From: drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On
Behalf
>Of Peter Troeger
>Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 5:58 AM
>To: DRMAA Working Group
>Subject: Re: [DRMAA-WG] DRMAA conformance rules
>
>Some updated version:
>
>A language binding document SHOULD be called "DRMAA 1.0" in its
>document title, if all interface and mapping rules and suggestions
>from this document are considered in the language binding. An
>implementation of the DRMAA API for a particular programming language
>and DRM system is "DRMAA 1.0 compliant", if the API implementation
>and behavior conforms to a "DRMAA 1.0" language binding document, or
>this document. In case of conflicts, the language-specific binding
>specification has precedence.
>
>It now provides a clearer definition of 'conformance'.
>
>Peter.
>
>
>
>Am 22.12.2006 um 10:27 schrieb Peter Troeger:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got a comment for the IDL spec that we do not have a clear
>> declaration of "conformance". Therefore, here is my suggestion for
>> some text block in the IDL spec:
>>
>> -- snip
>>
>> A language binding document is allowed to use "DRMAA 1.0" in its
>> document title, if all interface and mapping rules and suggestions
>> from this document are considered in the language binding. An
>> implementation of the DRMAA API for a particular programming language
>> and DRM system can be called "DRMAA 1.0 compliant", if (A) the API
>> implementation and behavior confirms to a "DRMAA 1.0" language
>> binding document, or this document. In case of conflicts, the
>> language-specific binding specification has precedence.
>>
>> -- snip
>>
>> What do you think ?
>> Peter.
>> --
>>   drmaa-wg mailing list
>>   drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg
>
>--
>  drmaa-wg mailing list
>  drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>  http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg