Balazs Konya [mailto:balazs.konya@hep.lu.se] said:
I'd like to discuss, in general, if there is need for an errata and if yes in which form.
OK. I think the things we found so far are just technical errors (mostly in the multiplicities), so we should be able to agree them and record the changes without much need for discussion, we just have to make sure that all the implementations keep in step. Probably we will find some more as we implement things - although I now have a provider for Service, Endpoint and AccessPolicy and I haven't noticed anything more for them. There have also beem some things specific to the LDAP schema, e.g. naming of foreign key attributes and typing of strings (ASCII -> UTF-8). In terms of a future schema revision I don't think we have anything yet, and the fact that we can add OtherInfo and Extensions will make it less critical. My guess for the areas where we may have most need for a revision would be support for virtual machines and MPI/parallel jobs, but for that we would need input from the experts. Stephen -- Scanned by iCritical.