[Pgi-wg] Promised document

[David Wallom]

Hi Moreno,

I would consider that this is becoming a fundamental problem within the
group. When it was setup it was certainly the impression of those that
started off the discussions etc that it would be a profiling and current
standards extension effort rather than all new standards...

David


On 15/05/2009 08:43, "Moreno Marzolla" <moreno.marzolla at pd.infn.it> wrote:

> Steven Newhouse wrote:
>> All,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I've just had the chance to catch up with my email and had not seen any
>> comment to Andrew's document? Was this discussed on the call this week?
>> What was the result...
> 
> The document has been discussed during the call, and at the moment there
> is no result yet. There are currently two positions within the PGI WG,
> one arguing that the best way to address the requirements is to write a
> new specification (taking the useful bits and pieces from
> BES/JSDL/whatever), and the other arguing that everything can be
> accomplished from existing specifications/profiles, plus additional
> profiling.
> 
> No consensus has emerged so far on which is the direction to go.
> Apparently it is possible to achieve the requirements with both
> approaches, but this alone is not enough to suggest one of them over the
> other.
> 
> As far as Andrew's document is concerned, I had a couple of comments but
> before making them I am skimming through the specs and profiles
> referenced therein so that I have a better understanding.
> 
> Moreno.