[ogsa-wg] EMS Architecture Scenarios v1.0+

[Hiro Kishimoto]

Hi Steven and Michel,

 >> This would be a useful reference for many groups and help to show how
 >> the work going on in individual WGs fits together.
 >
 > I agree to that. It would also actually help keeping scope creep out
 > of the involved Working Groups.

Sound great. Could we have some time to discuss this topic at the F2F?
Does Tuesday evening (e.g. 5:30-6pm) work for you guys?

Thanks,
----
Hiro Kishimoto

-------- Original Message  --------
Subject: Re:[ogsa-wg] EMS Architecture Scenarios v1.0+
From: Michel Drescher <Michel.Drescher at uk.fujitsu.com>
To: Steven Newhouse <Steven.Newhouse at microsoft.com>
Cc: "ogsa-wg at ogf.org" <ogsa-wg at ogf.org>
Date: 2007/08/09 18:53

> Hi Steve,
> 
> Steven Newhouse wrote:
>> [...]
>> Generally, having scenarios in the current version of the document using specs 
>> that are not developing and/or not going to be adopted is a concern to me. There 
>> is IMHO a clear benefit in having these sequence diagrams to inform other groups 
>> & incorporate their thinking into a single cohesive document. This should be one 
>> of our principals for future versions – not to expand into a massive sequence 
>> diagram repository but to keep a narrow focus on incremental scenarios in the 
>> EMS space. This would be a useful reference for many groups and help to show how 
>> the work going on in individual WGs fits together.
> 
> I agree to that. It would also actually help keeping scope creep out of the
> involved Working Groups.
> 
> I am not a UML guy, but I was wondering whether it is possible to
> draw/incorporate some sort of interface boundary between the "umbrella" EPS
> sequence diagrams, and the sequence diagrams that clearly belong to the WGs
> that solve a specific problem, i.e. OGSA-DMI, OGSA-BES, OGSA-RSS (which
> actually covers two topics w/ interfaces - CSG and EPS). This would vice
> versa keep the scope of EMS to some sort of "glue" sticking all the
> individual parts together.
> 
> Regarding your initial list of 4 topics, I would consider #2, #3 and #4
> prime topics of EMS 1.0+, and #1 more of an issue for the OGSA-RSS group,
> which needs some man power here I guess.
> 
> Cheers,
> Michel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> --
>   ogsa-wg mailing list
>   ogsa-wg at ogf.org
>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg