On 06/9/06 10:50, "Peter G. Lane" <lane@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
My main reason for not wanting to make use of one of the resource modelling approaches has to do with the burden of implementation. If Platform buys into one of these resource models, we no longer have to implement one simple spec and test compliance of that specification, but we need to implement and test compliance on a suite of specifications, for (in my opinion) no extra benefit. You might say that once you've implemented a resource modelling suite of specifications, you can use it over and over and thus amortize the cost of this implementation. But even at a small cost, it's not one that I'm willing to take, as the implementation of standards specifications is one feature in a sea of features that we implement from product release to product release.
Fair enough. Out of curiosity, though, if WSRF and WS-Transfer get reconciled, does this mean Platform will still opt not to implement a second spec? If on the other hand they would be willing to implement such a spec, would they be ok with deprecating the GetAttributesDocument operation at that time?
I believe that the reconciliation will have a positive effect, in that it will give tooling vendors a better feeling about these specifications, and hopefully they will implement some abstractions that we can use. My position is that I want to stay out of the WS tools business. I have no problem with updating specs later, including the deprecation of operations, etc. I see it as the natural evolution of the standard. -- Chris