[SAGA-RG] saga_sd.pdf

Andre,

Your suggested change would make the document longer without real
benefit. I did notice I had a small error in the bibliography which I
have corrected and I attach the .pdf file this time to make sure it goes
around with the images.

I think it should go to the OGF editor now to receive public comments. I
have no doubt that I will then be asked to make varioss changes so I
don't see any point in delaying further.

Steve


P.S. where do you get your SIDL definition from I thought I had the
definitive one.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andre Merzky [mailto:andre@merzky.net] 
> Sent: 06 March 2008 18:52
> To: Fisher, SM (Steve)
> Cc: Andre Merzky; saga-rg@ggf.org
> Subject: Re: Emailing: saga_sd.dvi
> 
> Quoting [Fisher, SM (Steve)] (Mar 06 2008):
> > 
> > > That would keep it consistent with the detailed spec, where
> > > you list only the long version (and rightly so).
> > 
> > Where is this desribed please. I have been looking at
> > https://computation.llnl.gov/casc/components/docs/users_guide/
> 
> Section 2.2.2 of the SAGA Core Spec:
> 
>   2.2.2 Default Parameter Values
>   
>   This document, in several places, adds default values in
>   the SIDL part of the API specification. It is up to the
>   language bindings to exploit any native means for default
>   parameter values. If this is not possible, the language
>   binding CAN abstain from default parameter values. Also,
>   if asynchronous method calls require additional
>   parameters, which might affect the handling of default
>   parameters in languages such as C and C++, the language
>   binding CAN deviate from this document in that respect.
> 
> So it would be up to the language binding really how that is
> interpreted.
> 
> However, I see what you are saying with the default
> parameter versus the ommitted parameter.  My wrong, I think
> we discussed this before.  So I think its fine as is, but
> you may want to add the detailed description for the second
> version then, like:
> 
>     - list_services
>       Purpose:  return the set of services that pass the set of 
>                 specified filters, for the current session
>       Format:   list_services   (in  string  service_filter,
>                                  in  string  data_filter,
>                                  out array<service_description> 
>                                              services);
>       Inputs:   service_filter:  filter on the basic service and 
>                                  site attributes and on related 
>                                  services
>                 data_filter:     filter on key/value pairs 
>                                  associated with the service
>       Outputs:  -
>       Throws:   NotImplemented
>                 BadParameter
>                 AuthorizationFailed
>                 AuthenticationFailed
>                 NoSuccess
>       Notes:    - the semantics is identical to the
>                   overloaded list_services method from
>                   above, but it creates the VO filter from
>                   the VO attributes of the saga::contexts
>                   instances attached to the current session.
> 
> Thanks, Andre.
> 
> 
> > Where looking at the JAVACC grammar in
> > 
> https://computation.llnl.gov/casc/components/docs/users_guide/
> node351.ht
> > ml
> > 
> > It says:
> > 
> > /**
> >  * Parse a SIDL argument.  Arguments begin with an optional copy
> > modifier
> >  * followed by in, out, or inout followed by a type and a formal
> > argument.
> >  * The argument is returned on the top of the argument stack.  This
> > routine
> >  * also checks that the copy modifier is used only for 
> symbol objects.
> > For
> >  * all other types, copy is redundant.
> >  */
> > Argument ::= [ <T_COPY> ] ( <T_IN> | <T_OUT> | <T_INOUT> ) 
> > 	 (Type Identifier | Rarray)
> > 
> > 
> > I want to make it quite clear in the spec that we are not 
> saying that
> > the vo_filter has a default value of "" - which is what 
> this notation
> > looks like for Python fans but that it can be omitted altogether!
> > 
> > Steve
> > 
> > > 
> > > I think we agreed at OGF22 that we would not need another
> > > call on the mailing list, as we seem to have group agreement
> > > since quite some time.  So, yes, I think its good to go to
> > > the Editor.
> > > 
> > > Thanks!!! :-))
> > > 
> > > Best, Andre.
> > >                         
> > > 
> > > Quoting [Fisher, SM (Steve)] (Mar 06 2008):
> > > > Subject: Emailing: saga_sd.dvi
> > > > From: "Fisher, SM (Steve)" <S.M.Fisher@rl.ac.uk>
> > > > To: Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net>
> > > > Cc: saga-rg@ggf.org
> > > > 
> > > >  <<saga_sd.dvi>> Andre,
> > > > 
> > > > At last I have made the requested changes to the SD spec. 
> > > Does anybody
> > > > object to it going for public comment now?
> > > > 
> > > > Steve
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > "We've got too much time to waste to stand around here 
> doing things."
> > >                                                           
>    - Tigger
> > > 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> "We've got too much time to waste to stand around here doing things."
>                                                              - Tigger
>