Ignacio, Randy, Thanks! So this is good. We agree that *extensions* and other bindings can be defined at the edges of the system, where the provider controls the interface and has integration needs specific to them. Some of the integration and extension mechanisms could even be provided by common libraries (eg XML tooling if the core format is not XML, or vice versa). But we still keep to one interoperable core. Any other comments on this point? alexis On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Ignacio Martin Llorente <llorente@dacya.ucm.es> wrote:
Hi,
2. You adopt the OCCI API, which would have commonality with other providers 3. You support the OCCI API for interop but provide, e.g., GG specific APIs and extensions, possibly in several styles
Not sure about the difference between these two. It seems fairly subtle to me, but #3 is absolutely what I've been advocating all along. I think vendors still need to compete. If the core is easily extensible then we can adopt it, but extend it for our particular needs. Over time as extensions make sense to move to the core they can.
A tools vendor building on top of us will get the benefits of being able to support the core easily across vendors. Implementing some support for extensions will then not be as onerous.
Yes, Scenario #3 is our vision for OCCI API. SImilar scenarios have been achieved in the cotext if other OGF WGs. See for example DRMAA WG (http://www.drmaa.org), we created a specification and defined several bindings, and different technology providers adopted the new specification by implementing one or several bindings, reporting about their implementation in experience reports. These job management systems compete in the market and provide some extensions to access specific functionality not provided by others. In any case, several tools and applications were created on top of the new core interface (see http://www.drmaa.org/stories.php), emerging a new ecosystem around the open standard.
See collection of documents (specifications, bindings and implementation reports) at http://www.drmaa.org/documents.php
Let me add, that some of the main technology providers were very reluctant to implement the standard, buy when they realized that the rest of providers were implementing the API, they started to implement the bindings. See implementations at http://www.drmaa.org/implementations.php
Cheers,
Ignacio