OGSA Teleconference - 18 May 2005
=================================

* Participants

  Mike Behrens (R2AD, LLC)
  Dave Berry (NeSC)
  Hiro Kishimoto (Fujitsu)
  Andrew Grimshaw (UVa)
  Fred Maciel (Hitachi)
  Manuel Pereira (IBM)
  Mathias Dalheimer (Fraunhofer-ITWM)
  Andreas Savva  (Fujitsu)
  Jem Treadwell (HP)
  Jay Unger (IBM)
  Pete Ziu (Northrop Grumman)
  
  Minutes: Andreas Savva

* Roadmap document review

** Architecture 1.5 & Glossary sections

   Reviewed initial entries by Jem.
   
   - Should the Glossary become a bigger document; to cover all
     documents in the Roadmap, for example?
     - Sounds too much. It would turn it into a GGF glossary.
     - Since that is clearly out of scope it should be constrained to
       just the Architecture document

** ACS section

   - Should the schedule table of all sections have the same
     milestones or not?
     - To make comparison easier they should all be the same.
   - It is also good to put the status of the current draft (or the
     date the entry was written) in the body of the section (not in
     the table)
   - Experience documents should also be listed out of the table

   - Should a 'next step' entry be added in the table to give more
     information about the WG?
     - The purpose of the roadmap is to get information on who is
       using what; and when it will be ready. If people want more
       information, e.g., "next steps" they can ask the individual WG.
     - Consensus is therefore to keep the table simple (or, at least,
       as simple as possible)

   - Agreed to review the table again at the May F2F

   - What is the desired granularity: season, month, or something
     else?
     - Month sounds best
     - The GGF number is meaningful to GGF participants but it is
       useful to people not active in GGF.
       - Agreed to use the *respective month of GGF* instead of
         season. In other words: March, June, October.
       - Mark used the season initially; asak him what he meant and
         get him to revise the ByteIO entry also.

   - Expected users should list specifications not projects.
     - Maybe the title should be changed to "Expected use"

** JSDL section

   - The table needs update for consistency.
   - Andreas to re-check the 'Adoption' level of CIM 2.9

** "Issues in Naming" section
   - Andrew wants to add this section to the Roadmap. The document has
     been around for some time. It is a product of the Naming design
     team.

** RNS section

   - Put actual submission dates for milestones met
   - Change to "will liaise"; and the table needs update too.
   - Confirmed that Public Comment is the formal milestone in the
     table.
   - The first draft is November. But the document has a longer
     history than that within the GFS-WG. This is mentioned. Agreed
     that this is useful information and good to keep.
   - There are dependencies with other specs and they will be
     mentioned here. (E.g., WSRF for resource properties. But if it
     depends on the WSRF BP then it is ok to just mention the BP.)

   - Expected Users: naming is ubiquitous so it is difficult to list
     all
     - Some alternatives discussed:
       1. Just list the specification within this roadmap
       2. Leave empty and get everyone who is using it to mention it;
          pick up the references and put the list here.

     - Hiro volunteered to do a first draft of "Expected Users" based
       on the specification listed in the Roadmap.

** OGSA Naming Profile section

   - This is probably not a profile. So it should be changed to
     "specification"

* May F2F agenda review

** BES-WG

   - Start time: 10:00am
   - Probably in the same room as the OGSA F2F (Andrew to check)
   - Agenda to be worked out during the next BES call

** Only other change is to add the co-chair discussion on the agenda

** Also add naming discussion (briefing session)

* GGF14 session schedule review

  - Reviewed the session schedule.