OGSA Teleconference 24 November 2004
====================================


* Participants

  Peter Ziu (Northrop Grumman)
  Jem Treadwell (HP)
  Andreas Savva (Fujitsu)
  Fred Maciel (Hitachi)
  Hiro Kishimoto (Fujitsu)
  Mike Behrens (R2AD, LLC)

* November 17 minutes approved with no changes

* OGSA F2F #9 update
  
  - At the moment 14 people have indicated they will be attending
  - Focus is probably on EMS & Data
  - Fred and Jem said they might not be able to make it on the first
    day (Wed). Hiro will try to arrange agenda accordingly.

* Other news

  - Use case document formally published as GFD.029
  - OGSA version 1.0 GFD.030; the number has been reserved for it. 
  - No number reserved for the Glosssary at the moment.

* Interested parties survey review

  - Hiro sent out the survey template and one partialy completed
    survey answer (Business Grid Project) as an example.

  - One concern raised already was that the survey is too long. A
    shorter version (that could be filled quickly) would be better
    especially for people not committed to OGSA.

  - How will the survey be carried out?
    - Send out to known parties; possibly talk directly to some of
      them before.
    - Post on griforge so that anyone can pick it up and encourage
      people to distribute to groups they know.

  - Review of the survey raised a number of comments:
    [page 3]
      - Bullet 3: Make it clear who the audience is. E.g., it also
        includes GGF groups like JSDL-WG.
      - Bullet 4: Clarify: Which specification that you need and are
        not being worked on.

    [page 4]
      - Make it clearer that existing text that does not apply may be
        deleted. E.g., by adding text like "delete text does not apply
        to you" or some other stylistic convention.
    
    - A more general concern was raised that it is unclear how to fill
      in the survey. Again some stylistic convention to distinguish
      informative part from the required fields would help. One
      concrete suggestion was to turn user input into tables or change
      to a questionnaire with tick boxes.
  
    [page 7]
      - Delete Role-involvement figure; it is not meant for people to
        update. It just shows how the end results will look.
        
    - General comment on the usage of word 'party'; it does not look
      right. Many candidates, e.g., project, group, effort, "activity"
      but no good alternative.

    - Change vender to vendor.

    - Are results confidential or not?
      - Probably normal GGF rules apply. But it is a good idea to make
        this clear by adding a confidentiality clause and state how
        the results will be used
    - Proposal to allow for anonymous submissions or at least
      submissions that do not identify the submitter.

  - Is the intention to distribute the Business Grid Project survey
    together with survey?
    - Yes, it is easier to complete if there is a filled-in example.

  - The plan is to get some survey results by the F2F and review them there
    - Not sure yet who can provide but lots of candidates:
    - JSDL: Andreas 
      - But not sure how applicable because the group specifically
        does not rely on any specific architecture
    - WSDM & DMTF survey: Fred 
      - Might not have a completely filled in one by the F2F but could
        probably give an oral report.
    - Globus: Maybe Ian.
    - HP: Jem will check.
    - Nextgrid: Maybe Dave Snelling
    - EGEE, OGSA-DAI: Ask Dave Berry 
    - IBM: Maybe Jay
    - Mike/Pete: Their project has not been accepted yet but would be
      willing to do it based on what they would like to see.

* Glossary update

  - Last week discussed and came to consensus on resource/management
    terms
  - Completed review of all comments
  - Jem is now updating the document and should have a version ready
    soon.
  - Review of actions
    - self-management: Andreas to send revised text to Jem
    - Andreas to check with Andrew about naming revision
    - Andreas to check usage of producer/consumer/provider in OGSA
      document in particular whether it is used consistently and
      whether it is worth adding to the glossary.
 
  - Reviewed Mike's proposed choreography writeup

* OGSA version 1.0 status and public comments review

** Status
  - Revisions completed for data, resource management, and information
    services sections.
  - Waiting for: EMS, Framework, Security, Self-Management, Introduction
    - Security, Self-management and introduction revisions are fairly
      minor.
  - Public comments for Requirements have not been reviewed yet

** Public comments review
   (Numbers correspond to rows in comments spreadsheet)

  - [21]: It is a v2 issue
  - [22]: 1. Add text (a line or so) why these use cases were useful
             in general; pick a couple as example. rest as v2 work.
          2. Do as far as possible for consistency but it is very
             minor point

  - [23]: No problem really but make order consistent with Glossary
  - [24]: Revise: Delete 'thus' and "...it must be possible to
          integrate these legacy systems..."
  - [25]: Explain as style; Revisit in v2
  - [26]: Revise; Perhaps check recent presentation on
          metadata. 
  - [27]: Autonomy is what's meant here. Point raised is covered in a
          different section (virtualization).
  - [28]: Revised 'information' to 'data'