No reference to a compliance test suite? Hrabri
-----Original Message----- From: drmaa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:drmaa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Peter Troeger Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 5:58 AM To: DRMAA Working Group Subject: Re: [DRMAA-WG] DRMAA conformance rules
Some updated version:
A language binding document SHOULD be called "DRMAA 1.0" in its document title, if all interface and mapping rules and suggestions from this document are considered in the language binding. An implementation of the DRMAA API for a particular programming language and DRM system is "DRMAA 1.0 compliant", if the API implementation and behavior conforms to a "DRMAA 1.0" language binding document, or this document. In case of conflicts, the language-specific binding specification has precedence.
It now provides a clearer definition of 'conformance'.
Peter.
Am 22.12.2006 um 10:27 schrieb Peter Troeger:
Hi,
I got a comment for the IDL spec that we do not have a clear declaration of "conformance". Therefore, here is my suggestion for some text block in the IDL spec:
-- snip
A language binding document is allowed to use "DRMAA 1.0" in its document title, if all interface and mapping rules and suggestions from this document are considered in the language binding. An implementation of the DRMAA API for a particular programming language and DRM system can be called "DRMAA 1.0 compliant", if (A) the API implementation and behavior confirms to a "DRMAA 1.0" language binding document, or this document. In case of conflicts, the language-specific binding specification has precedence.
-- snip
What do you think ? Peter. -- drmaa-wg mailing list drmaa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg
-- drmaa-wg mailing list drmaa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg