Fwd: [ogsi-wg] ASAP, WS-Resource

[John Fuller <jfuller@wernervas.com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: David Snelling <d.snelling@fle.fujitsu.com>
> Date: February 2, 2004 5:40:20 AM CST
> To: John Fuller <jfuller@wernervas.com>, <ogsi-wg@gridforum.org>, "ASAP   (E-mail)" <asap@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Subject: Re: [ogsi-wg] ASAP, WS-Resource
>
> John,
>
> This may bounce on the ASAP list.
>
> On 30/1/04 14:57, "John Fuller" <jfuller@wernervas.com> wrote:
>
> > If I read the WS-Resource documents correctly, if our factory were to
> > be a WS-Resource factory, should our current communication of URIs be
> > replaced with WS-Addressing endpoint references?
>
> Yes, would be my immediate answer. There are two bits of information
> necessary from a factory: the address of the WS and some way to identify the
> resource pertinent to the message. WS-Addressing is an existing, well
> understood and available (if not yet standard) way to package this
> information, along with lots of other information.
>
> > ... If this structure is useful, I suppose
> > another concern is whether
> > our document working within a standards body should build on a
> > specification that hasn't been submitted to a standards body.
>
> Ultimately, this is one we will need to address with WSRF too. The more
> groups that can put pressure on the WSA authors, the better, but is must be
> the decision of your working group.
>
> > If we use WS-Resource, to what extent should we replace our existing
> > messages?
>
> I would move carefully here. WSRF is not yet completely stable, but there
> has been a lot of discussion on the language and terminology. I believe most
> of it will remain fairly stable.
>
> > Our document already uses the term "resource properties" for the
> > factory, observer, instance (and activity), should their properties
> > be expressed as ResourceProperties?
>
> Intuitively I would say yes, but I don't know what your "resource
> properties" actually are.
>
> > Since we define the observer role anyway, should we use WS-Notification
> > for our state changes?  For our completion request?
> > Again, there's a bit of added complexity with Topic spaces and the
> > associated expression language, and additional roles to potentially
> > support in the publish-subscribe model...
>
> If you find WS-Notification too complex, please send us more details. You
> may not be alone in this view.
>
> > OGSI-people:
> > I'm working on a C++ open source implementation of ASAP, and I know
> > Globus is working on a WS-Resource implementation.  It would be nice to
> > collaborate as possible in light of the additional functionality and
> > infrastructure potentially required with WS-Resource.
>
> You should direct the C++ question to the Globus team (www.globus.org). I
> don't know their specific plans wrt C++. I do know that the initial priority
> will be with a Java platform, but beyond that you will need to ask.
>
>
> -- 
>
> Take care:
>
> Dr. David Snelling <d.snelling@fle.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)
This e-mail has been scanned by Trend InterScan Software.

This e-mail (and its attachment(s) if any) is intended for the named 
addressee(s) only. It may
contain information which is privileged and confidential within the 
meaning of the applicable law.
Unauthorised use, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited and may 
be unlawful.

If you are not the intended recipient please delete this email and 
contact the sender via email return.

Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Ltd (FLE) does not accept responsibility 
for changes made to this email after
it was sent. The views expressed in this email may not necessarily be 
the views held by FLE.

Unless expressly stated otherwise, this email does not form part of a 
legally binding contract
or agreement between the recipient and Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Ltd (FLE).