glue-wg-bounces@ogf.org
[mailto:glue-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Warren Smith said: Of course, the TeraGrid GLUE 2 XML Schema isn't a standard and I can't say how similar it will be to an official OGF GLUE 2 XML Schema.
Well, this is supposed to be a community effort so it should be possible for you to contribute to the definition of the official XML rendering ... however personally I'm not involved in that so I can't comment directly.
In fact, one warning I'd give about the TeraGrid schema is that we chose a flat hierarchy of XML elements in that schema (e.g. ComputeActivity is a sibling of ComputeShare instead of a child of ComputeShare). The last discussions I remember seeing on the GLUE working group list seemed to have more people favoring a deeper hierarchy...
I think Nordugrid favoured that. However, for the LDAP rendering we tried to keep the abstract schema properties as much as possible - LDAP obviously forces you to have a tree, but the objects are all linked via foreign keys and unqiue IDs so you don't need the tree to navigate. In that case you could potentially restructure the tree without changing any queries. If XML follows the same kind of route you could even do joint queries across representations. Stephen -- Scanned by iCritical.