I've marked up many comments on the document, most of which are editing nits that I can provide in the form of a marked-
up Word document, if nobody else is already doing that.  I'll limit my comments here to the more important ones; please 
let me know if you also want the markup.

1. Because there were significant changes late in the development of the v1 OGSA document, there are some 
inconsistencies in the terminology, which it would be useful to address.  In particular, OGSA's Program Execution is now
 Execution Management Services, EMS.

2. There is a general need for more references, and citations in the body of the document  e.g. to the OGSA document, 
and in Section 1 to the OGSA Glossary.  In some places, URLs appear in the text, and (IMHO) these would be better as 
refs.

3. In Section 2, I found it hard to relate the text to Figure 1. I suggest adding a reference to the figure from within 
the text, and it would be helpful if the description aligned better with the labels in the picture  e.g. talk about the 
Application Management layer, rather than the application layer, and say a little more about the responsibilities of 
each. There are a number of typos in the text on this page, which may make it harder.

4. Nit: Even though Table 1 is presumably implemented with a Word table, it's really a Figure, and I'd suggest labeling 
it as one.  The Table reference in the para is missing the cross-reference, as is the ref to Figure 2 on the next page.

5. In Figure 2, some of the text is truncated at the base.

6. On page 12, there is no intro text to the bullets in the Integrity section, as there is in the preceding lists.

7. In 4.1.1, There's no longer a technical meaning of the term Grid Service from the OGSA perspective.  The Glossary 
entry recognizes that the term will still be used, but to avoid confusion I'd suggest replacing the first few words with
 something like "Web services can be used to represent and virtualize any resource�".  4.1.2 would need a similar 
change, and the section heading would also need to change.

8. In 4.2.1 I'd suggest splitting para 1 into 4 bullets for clarity, and the paras need space to separate them.

9. In 4.2.3 the last sentence of the third para doesn't make sense, and the paras need spacing.

10. In 4.3.3, OLAP needs to be spelled out.  Same for SCM in 4.6.3.

11. 4.5 and 4.6 have References sections embedded.  I understand why, but you might consider moving them to the main 
References section, or if you prefer not to do that the citations in the text need to somehow clearly reference the 
local sections.  In 4.6 it seems odd that the References appear in the middle of the section, instead of at the end, 
especially as there are citations following it.

12. In 4.5.3, item 1), the final sentence of the first para (top of page 23) doesn't make sense to me.

13. In 4.5.4, I'm not sure what's meant by a "command line API," but if it's a common term ignore this comment!

14. 4.1 to 4.6 are use cases, but 4.7 to 4.10 seem to be an analysis of the use cases.  There is no explanation  just an
 abrupt transition.  I'd suggest some restructuring, and an intro para for the summaries.  

15. In 4.7, Discovery and Brokering starts with "the scenario", but it's not clear which scenario is being discussed  or
 is it all of them?

16. In Section 5, presumably the heading should be "High-Level CDDLM Architecture."

17. In Figure 7, the dotted arrows are missing from labels 9 & 10.

18. In 6.4, one standard is mentioned in the opening sentence, so the phrase "neither of these management standards" 
doesn't make sense.  Note also that WSDM is not yet a standard and isn't completed.

19. Near the end of the first para in 6.4, there's a legacy reference to "item (d)" that needs to be fixed.

- Jem Treadwell (Jem.Treadwell@hp.com)