[tsc] Draft 0.1 of the technical Strategy Document.

[David Snelling]

Geoffery,


On 21 Aug 2006, at 15:26, Geoffrey Fox wrote:

> Here is a quick comment from the "owner of pen"
> Looking at table 1, it seems to me that it might be better
> to present as current emphasis (adding OGSA-DAI -- I am not
> certain why this is left out) and discuss how we add
> standards work to meet industry needs.

Agreed. The spec name is actually WS-DAI (OGSA-DAI in the UK  
project's name). They have a bunch of stuff already in the pipeline  
ready for publication, which may be why I left them off. BUT since  
our roadmap includes implementation and deployment, WS-DAI is still  
far from finished. The pen is yours, please add WS-DAI and the two  
language specs, relational (WS-DAIR) and XML (WS-DAIX) database.  If  
you can adapt one of the use cases (or add one) to include WS-DAI  
that would help, as this is probably necessary eventually.

> It reads a little like
> a fixed agenda at moment and thats fine if Industry requests
> this agenda but not so good if board requests additional
> areas of emphasis.

We need to tread the narrow road here, but describing our process of  
creating this roadmap is probably necessary. Can you add a section  
about this? It can be "To Be Done" if you like or you can include an  
N step bullet list: gather stakeholder input, gather resource reports  
from chairs, draft updated version, socialize, redraft, and publish.  
Or something like this. Then later we can refine it.

> Putting on my "eScience hat", I would suggest that OGF can offer
> more than standards to Industry. We can also offer the world's experts
> to guide strategy.
> For example, I just spent a day and a half with a group from one of
> the Big Pharma companies. This group has already fully adopted
> web services but for moment at least new standards are not their  
> priority
> (they view field as still experimental) but rather Grid strategy for
> knowledge management.
> I would suggest adopting a broader view in document encompassing  
> all OGF functions
> (standards, enterprise, eScience)

I thought about this and that's why all the statements about the  
"other work" of OGF are there. I think something more of possible/ 
necessary, but I'm not sure how to describe it in language that can  
be consumed by the folks expecting this document. Ideas from you and  
Robert welcome. Fell free to add a section, if only a place holder.

Remember, anything goes in this draft as long as the note about no  
consensus yet stays in. I've asked Mark to make sure the BoD know  
that this is very much work in progress.

Thanks for taking the pen Geoffery.

>
> David Snelling wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> Here is the initial draft I promised last week based on our  
>> agreement around the outline. Sorry for the slight delay, I had no  
>> network access over the weekend. Here is the todo list:
>>
>> 1) Tuesday I go on Holiday and will probably not have email  
>> access, but you never know.
>>
>> 2) Geoffery has the pen, so send all change suggestions to the  
>> list and let Geoffery add them to the document.
>>
>> 3) There are outstanding actions  (highlighted in yellow in the  
>> document) for Steven and Chris. Send text to Geoffery via the list.
>>
>> 4) This document will be presented to the BoD on the 24th.  
>> Geoffery: Make sure Mark L has the latest version on Wednesday night!
>>
>> 5) The following is the status section for this document:
>>
>> This is a DRAFT document. The contents at this time DO NOT yet  
>> reflect the consensus view of the Technical Strategy Committee. It  
>> is being provided to gain input and feedback with respect to the  
>> structure and type of content, e.g. is this document fit for  
>> purpose? Feedback on the technical content is NOT expected at this  
>> early stage of development. Eventually, distribution will be  
>> unlimited, but for the time being, distribution is limited to the  
>> Technical Strategy Committee (TSC), the Board of Directors (BoD),  
>> and the Grid Forum Steering Group (GFSG).
>>
>> 6) Mark PLEASE make sure the BoD read this paragraph at least. I  
>> am not happy showing documents outside of any group with so little  
>> time to generate consensus.
>>
>> 7) Mark also lead the BoD to provide comments as requested, e.g.  
>> wrt  fit for purpose rather than technical content. The later  
>> needs more time.
>>
>> There is now a GF project for the TSC. I have put the document  
>> under Drafts and attached it here. In future, let's try to limit  
>> attachments.
>>
>> https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/projects/tsc
>>
>> -- 
>> Take care:
>>
>>     Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com >
>>     Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe
>>     Hayes Park Central
>>     Hayes End Road
>>     Hayes, Middlesex  UB4 8FE
>>
>>     +44-208-606-4649 (Office)
>>     +44-208-606-4539 (Fax)
>>     +44-7768-807526  (Mobile)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ tsc mailing list  
>> tsc at ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
>
> -- : : Geoffrey Fox gcf at indiana.edu FAX 8128567972 http:// 
> www.infomall.org : Phones Cell 812-219-4643 Home 8123239196 Lab  
> 8128567977 : SkypeIn 812-669-0772 with voicemail, International  
> cell 8123910207

-- 

Take care:

     Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com >
     Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe
     Hayes Park Central
     Hayes End Road
     Hayes, Middlesex  UB4 8FE

     +44-208-606-4649 (Office)
     +44-208-606-4539 (Fax)
     +44-7768-807526  (Mobile)