Andre Merzky wrote:
> Quoting [
stephen.burke@stfc.ac.uk] (Mar 10 2010):
>
>>> Service, Endpoint and AccessPolicy and I haven't noticed anything more
>>> for them.
>>>
>> Actually I just noticed one thing for Service which is slightly
>> ambiguous. We have:
>>
>> QualityLevel QualityLevel_t 1 The maturity of the Service in terms of
>> the quality of the underlying software components; the value corresponds
>> to the highest QualityLevel among the available Endpoints.
>>
>> However you can potentially have a Service with no Endpoints -
>> presumably you could still define its QualityLevel, but formally that
>> description wouldn't apply.
>>
>
> Sorry if I jump into the discussion sideways - I am not really part
> of the glue group, just lurking here.
>
> Anyway: yes, you certainly can have services w/o endpoints, or at
> least which have no need to expose an endpoint. For example, we
> have a garbage collection service which at specific intervals scans
> our data bases and purges expired entries. That service is never
> contacted from client side, and nobody really cares where it runs
> (apart from the deployment point of view of course).
>
> And yes, that service could very well specify quality levels, such
> as run frequency.
>
> Not sure if that is relevant to the discussion, just wanted to throw
> that in ;-)
>
> Best, Andre.
>
>
>