[jsdl-wg] Splitting Application
Andreas Savva
andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com
Wed Feb 9 08:20:21 CST 2005
Donal
Thanks for the summary. Some quick comments inline. (I've shortened some
of the text.)
Donal K. Fellows wrote:
> This is the summary of the other part of Igor's proposal.
>
> Basically, the proposal is that all elements inside Application should
> be done as extensibility elements except for ApplicationType and
> Description.
I think there is an argument to also allow ApplicationName and
ApplicationVersion in addition to the ones above. If not, then these are
probably misnamed.
>
> Then, the other current (v0.9 of the doc) elements inside Application
> should be moved to another XML namespace that describes "executable"
> type jobs (i.e. jobs that are fundamentally the running of an executable
> even if that happens to be hidden away inside). Then, the other types of
> jobs (particularly web-services invocations and SQL queries) that have
> been mentioned involve other sets of extensibility elements inside.
>
>
> For the "executable" elements, I suggest the following namespace:
> http://www.ggf.org/namespaces/2005/02/jsdl-executable.xsd
I'm ok with this.
> :
> We need to add a note that the
> ApplicationType is *not* describing the format of the executable.
> (Thanks to Chin Chee-Kai for raising these issues.)
Good point.
>
> Arguably, Limits should be done this way too, since they're only
> meaningful to executable-type jobs.
Something to discuss on a call.
>
>
> For a "webService" invocation, the remaining body of the Application
I am against trying to define *normatively* anything beyond the basic
structure and the 'executable' ApplicationType for JSDL version 1.0. I
don't mind having webserviceinvocation and sql (or anything else for
that matter) as *examples* that can help us get the structure right. But
the focus should be on delivering a document that can go to the GGF
Editor soon. My take is that ApplicationTypes beyond 'executable' (or
executable-similar) should be defined as extensions post v1.0.
> element (apart from the ApplicationType and Description) should be a
> :
>
>
Andreas
More information about the jsdl-wg
mailing list