|
Greg Newby: 05/06/2007 4:46 AM EDT
|
|
Action: |
Update
resolution changed from Accepted to none (no value)
|
|
Greg Newby: 09/11/2006 10:21 AM EDT
|
|
Action: |
Update
Assigned To changed from Joel Replogle to none (no value)
Priority changed from 1 to 0
|
|
Greg Newby: 09/11/2006 10:19 AM EDT
|
|
Action: |
Move
Moved from Submit OGF Draft to Published
Category changed from Recommendations Track to Community Practice
Group changed from Management to APME
resolution set to Accepted
Status changed from ready to publish to Closed
|
|
Greg Newby: 09/03/2006 5:31 PM EDT
|
|
Comment: |
Please disregard my earlier uploads. This one is correct, I think.
|
|
Attachment: |
gfd-r.073.doc
(919.5 KB)
|
|
Action: |
Update
Added an attachment.
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 09/03/2006 4:15 PM EDT
|
|
Comment: |
Published as GFD-R.073. Thanks to authors/editors
for their work on this document.
|
|
Attachment: |
gfd-r.073.doc
(758 KB)
|
|
Action: |
Update
Added an attachment.
|
|
Greg Newby: 07/03/2006 2:58 PM EDT
|
|
Comment: |
Uploading new version received via email. This will go forward shortly.
|
|
Attachment: |
draft-ggf-acs-spec-1.0.doc
(855.5 KB)
|
|
Action: |
Update
Added an attachment.
|
|
Greg Newby: 06/13/2006 10:11 AM EDT
|
|
Comment: |
Approved for publication by the GFSG. This will
go into final editor review to check formatting etc.
|
|
Action: |
Update
Assigned To changed from Hiro Kishimoto to Greg Newby
Priority changed from 2 to 1
Status changed from Final 15day GFSG Review to Final Editor Review
|
|
Greg Newby: 05/26/2006 2:14 PM EDT
|
|
Comment: |
This document appears well-written, and useful.
It is advanced to final 15-day GFSG review
prior to publication.
It will be discussed in the June 13 GFSG telecon,
or as soon thereafter as it can be scheduled.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 05/26/2006 2:14 PM EDT
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from Final Editor Review to Final 15day GFSG Review
|
|
Hiro Kishimoto: 05/23/2006 11:13 PM EDT
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from Returned to Author(s) to Final Editor Review
|
|
Hiro Kishimoto: 05/23/2006 11:12 PM EDT
|
|
Comment: |
Hi Greg,
ACS-WG has finished revision of this document and ask me to bring it forward to GGF Editor. They did good job, made a final call, and answered all
public comments in the tracker.
As a shepherd, I would very much appreciate it if you could look at this revised document.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 05/03/2006 6:28 PM EDT
|
|
Comment: |
Authors/editors: Please review public comments, and
if necessary submit a revised document to this tracker.
Work with your area director as needed for guidance.
When you are ready to advance this document to the
next step, assign the tracker back to gbn. Thanks!
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 05/03/2006 6:28 PM EDT
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from Public Comment Period to Returned to Author(s)
assigned_to changed from 9357 to 155
Priority changed from 3 to 2
|
|
|
Toshiyuki Nakata: 03/09/2006 4:40 AM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Comments included in the pdf (Commentor Toshiyuki Nakata)
(t-nakata@cw.jp.nec.com)
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/31/2006 12:00 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Moved to public comment. This will be due 60 days
after announced. Authors/editors please seek people
to make comments.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/31/2006 12:00 PM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from GFSG Review to Public Comment Period
assigned_to changed from 155 to 9357
Priority changed from 4 to 3
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/09/2006 5:11 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Brief update: the GFSG has not yet had a chance to discuss this, but will do so over the next week or so.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 12/12/2005 12:24 AM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Thanks for this submission. It is nicely organized and
well-written. I did not see any changes to recommend,
so am moving it into initial 15-day GFSG review prior
to 60-day public comment.
Because of holidays, it might be an extra week or more
before we get this document on the GFSG teleconference
agenda. As long as any items raised by the GFSG are
fairly minor, we'll be able to get this into public comment
soon.
In the meantime, you might want to go ahead with addressing
Hiro Kishimoto's comments -- these could be done before
public comment, or after.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 12/12/2005 12:24 AM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from Initial Editor Review to GFSG Review
assigned_to changed from 302 to 155
Priority changed from 5 to 4
|
|
Hiro Kishimoto: 11/27/2005 8:33 AM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Hi Greg,
I've read this document and I believe this document is ready for GFSG review to enter public comments period. Application Contents Service is one of
key grid services of OGSA EMS. It defines OGSA WSRF BP based archive interface and archiver descriptor format.
The following is my comments and they should be posted as public comments.
(1) The title should be ACS 1.0. Revision 1 is redundant.
(2) Since OGSA is a trademark of GGF, it should be mentioned in the first page.
(3) Policy rule (on page 4) is too generic. Should be called more
specific term.
(4) Section 1.2 need some examples which explain what are out of scope.
(5) Section title 2.1.2. I am not sure what does "Grid" mean here.
(6) Section 2.1.3 needs more explanation.
(7) Section 2.4 should read "OGSA WSRF BP" instead of "OGSA
infrastructure."
(8) Section 3.1.5. Please explain the difference between AA
Identifier and WS-Name.
(9) I think section 3.2.1 should be a part of Chapter 5.
(10) Section 3.3.4 mentions Byte-IO and GridFTP as a part
of OGSA-data WG. However, these are developed by the other
WGs.
(11) Section 3.3.5 refers OGSA WSDM profile but it is not yet
planned.
(12) Since chapter 7 is not normative, please use "must" instead
of "MUST."
(13) Schema definitions in section 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3 need GGF
copyright statement.
(14) I prefer to separate normative reference and non-normative reference (page 74). Also OGSA WSRF BP and WSRF references are not uptodate.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 11/21/2005 6:42 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Dear Author or Draft Editor-
Thank you for submitting your draft to the GGF Editor! In most cases the draft
will be assigned to an Area Director for review as the first step in the document
publication process.
The URL provided with this note allows you to track your submission and to
communicate with the GGF Editor or Area Director(s) who are reviewing the
draft. At the very bottom of the tracker display (web page) a detailed log of all
actions related to this submission is available.
You may also wish to alert your colleagues that the draft has been submitted, and from their GridForge accounts they may wish to monitor this item in
order to receive email any time action is taken regarding this submission.
Informational and Experimental drafts are reviewed by the GGF Editor and one
or more Area Directors. The GGF Editor will determine whether the draft is
ready for public comment, or if there are items for the author(s) to address
prior to public comment. This initial review generally takes no more than two
weeks.
Community Practice and Recommendations Track drafts require a GFSG review
prior to public comment. This can add 2-3 weeks to the initial GGF Editor
review depending on current workload of the GFSG.
Please do not hesitate to inquire about the status of your submission at any time by way of comments added to this tracker item, which will be
automatically emailed to the individual who appears in the "assigned to" field.
Thanks very much-
GGF Editor
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 11/21/2005 6:42 PM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from Open to Initial Editor Review
Priority changed from - to 5
|
|
|
|