[GRIDRPC-WG] Recharter?

[Yusuke Tanimura]

Hi Eddy,

Thanks for your reply.

> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> * Definition of possible introspection capabilities for call
> >> arguments and attributes.
> >
> > Your comment:
> > Each item is clear. This one seems more vague, no ? An example
> > should be useful.
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > I heard this is to define client APIs and/or a model for retrieving
> > arguments information (e.g. data types, counts) of remote functions.
> > For example, if we implement higher-level API such as task-farming
> > over GridRPC, we may need this kind of function.
> >
> 
> OK, I see. Then maybe it's more clear like this :
> 
> * Definition of possible introspection capabilities for call arguments  
> and attributes of remote functions (e.g. data types, counts, etc.)
> 
> OK, it's a detail, it's not realy important. You can ignore this  
> comment, as you wish.
> 
> > Do you think if the function is necessary for your proposed "Data
> > Management API?"  If not, because this recharter should focus on
> > "Data Management API," we should remove the sentence from the
> > recharter document.
> >
> 
> No you are right, this kind of function could be useful.

Ok.  The sentence has been back to the document and corrected as
you commented.


> > So, I propose modifying the sentence as follows,
> >
> > * Wire protocol interoperability between implementations -- achieving
> > full interoperability between implementations requires defining, in
> > essence, a wire protocol.  This is actually orthogonal to the problem
> > of defining the user-level model and API and, hence, can be done later
> > as part of a separate effort.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> 
> Yes it's more clear. But as you explain before you can define what do  
> you mean by full interoperability (you mean at the binary level). I  
> think it's important to remember that we plan to have an  
> interoperability at the client source code level (100% compatibility  
> if the client source code is Grid-RPC API compliant)

I see.  "full interoperability" was changed to "binary level
interoperability" and I added the statement, "Note that interoperability
at the client source code level (100% compatibility if the client source
code is Grid-RPC API compliant) is in our scope."

Thanks,

-----------------------------------------------------
Yusuke Tanimura <yusuke.tanimura at aist.go.jp>
Information Technology Research Institute, AIST
1-1-1 Umezono, Tsukuba Central 2
Tsukuba City 305-8568, Japan
TEL: +81-29-862-6703  / FAX: +81-29-862-6601