(1) Are multiple base profiles OK to begin with?
Try to steer the discusion past that one (or around it), so that we can get to the next problem:
The purpose of the BOF is to explore if there is interest in developing a second OGSA profile. I don't see this as a discussion point within the BoF unless their is overlap.. and isn't this what the GFSG examines?
(2) How do the protocols sets in this area (the WSRF+WSN set, and the WS-Transfer etc. set) compare to each other?
Like all BOFs it will split into two parts... a discussion through a series of presentations outlining approaches to building web service grids, and then discussion/defining next steps.
(3) What are the plans for the "WS-I-only" profile?
What is being proposed is not a WS-I only OGSA profile. WS-I (basic & security profiles) define a set of specifications and how they should be used. These all obviously have WS-I compliant syntax. The WSRF profile defines an additional set of specifications and how they can be used (beyond those in WS-I) which are also WS-I compliant. Any profile that comes out of the proposed WG will obviously build upon the WS-I base and use WS-I compliant syntax. Which specifications it will use is open to discussion... hence the 'minimal' in the WG title. While I would be the first to agree this is not a great title it is IMHO better than pre-judging the WG's activity by calling it (say) the OGSA WS-XYZ profile. Steven -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Steven Newhouse Tel:+44 (0)2380 598789 Deputy Director, Open Middleware Infrastructure Institute (OMII) Suite 6005, Faraday Building (B21), Highfield Campus, Southampton University, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK