Hi;

I guess I'm still confused about what you are asking to be addressed. How actual credentials are used seems like an implementation decision and thus out of scope of an interface spec.

The main thing that comes to mind is how a BES service would expose which types of credentials it can handle or which it expects.  I think you’re right that the rest of it – e.g. declaring a set of standard credentials types so that interop can actually be implemented – is part of the HPC profile work.

True, and yet that's what the BES spec is basically doing with activities as well. It gives you an EPR to *something*. So if we are consistent about this interop philosophy then we really ought to define the activity interface within the same spec.

“Someone” will have to define all the details that are necessary to enable actual interoperability.  Much of that work can be done in the HPC profile.  As I said in a previous email response, I like your suggestion of defining the activity interface – NOTE: just the generic query/modify part having to do with JSDL and things like cancellation – in the same spec.

Marvin.