Just to comment on a couple of these points... On Mar 21, 2005, at 3:36 AM, Karl Czajkowski wrote:
My impression is that it is an uphill battle to convince the OGSA-BES group to consider seriously using WS-Agreement, while they all seem clear on the idea of using JSDL. I think this is due to several facts:
1) They are on an aggressive schedule and so have some conservatism.
I believe that they were talking about getting interoperable implementations by the end of 2005, which is very aggressive...
2) There are some preconcieved notions of what BES should be that look more like GRAM or other job-specific interfaces.
A strawman interface was presented, but this was (I felt) little more than "these are the things that BES should support". Pre-conceived is a little harsh - everything presented can be changed.
3) There was a bit of the lingering anti-wsrf sentiment floating around Seoul.
There has been some excellent discussion on the OGSA-WG list just prior to this meeting on whether or not WS-RF is necessary, and if it is, what is it necessary for? But to be fair, it's not "sentiment" - there are some very astute people saying that the Grid community doesn't need WS-RF. Unfortunately, in Seoul, there was practically no debate on this subject (at least, not inside of the WG sessions!). I would expect to see this being played out in the OGSA-BES list. It's a debate that needs to happen. Jon.