Dear All, please find a first draft of the activity instance schema here [1]. Alexander and I discussed it today an I made incorporated the changes. Issues to be discussed at OGF: - Access control (Requirement R008b). I noted "Who can retrieve information about the activity. Access parts of it." as the purpose of this element. Alexander pointed out correctly that it does not make sense to carry this kind of information within the document. Then I remembered that initially we had something in there to capture security-related requirements which are related to the activity's execution. I first thouhgt of adding some <activity-instance:NonFunctionalRequirements>, but this seems to broad (and there are non-functional requirements scattered around the schema). I therefore put an <activity-instance:SecurityRequirements> element in the schema as a placeholder for whatever originates from the discussion at OGF. - Although we discussed the "profiling versus inclusion of JSDL/RUS" a number of times, I suggest to bring it to the table if time permits. I will try to come up with a second version of the schema to have a proposal for he discussion. - Provenance records (R003), check-pointing (xR023) and data locations (xR025). These are not weighted high, but in case people have a nice idea how to include them ... Have a safe trip and enjoy Italy. Best regards, Philipp. ps A weighted list of requirements with comments regarding their inclusion into the schema can be found here [2]. [1] http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.jsdl-wg/do... [2] http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.jsdl-wg/do...