[jsdl-wg] DataStaging concerns

[Peter G.Lane]

On May 20, 2005, at 7:46 AM, Donal K. Fellows wrote:

> Karl Czajkowski wrote:
>> Donal: did we lose the xsd:any child of the top-level JSDL document
>> element?
>
> Not from rev 18 of the spec, and having xsd:any##other everywhere
> (except in RangeValueType of course) is certainly our intention.
>
>> If we decided to have a WS-GRAM dialect of JSDL where we just
>> transliterated some of the biggies like our staging clause, I would
>> expect there to be, for example, a single (or three) "RFT element" at
>> the top-level as a peer to the POSIX application and resource sections
>> and zero jsdl:FileStaging elements.
>
> Sounds fine to me actually. I'm personally intending to use JSDL in an
> overall workflow document where the datastaging bits are peers to the
> JSDL document-lets. Obviously this is a scope way outside the classic
> scope of JSDL, but that doesn't bother me in the slightest. :^)

Now I believe I understand better when Karl mentioned to me that JSDL 
would be most useful for use in GRAM if it were used in conjunction 
with something like the BES.  Semantics, as I read and you allude to 
here, are out of scope of the JSDL spec.  So the only way to get real 
interop between DRMs which use JSDL is to also have a standard semantic 
behind it.

Anyway, I appreciate everyone's time in explaining the finer points.

Thanks!
Peter
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2782 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/jsdl-wg/attachments/20050520/d4552b16/attachment.bin