Mass Move

Document has finished public comment period. No comments were made. GFSG will decide whether is document will re-enter public comment period again or 
not.

https://forge.gridforum.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=441

1. Moved the Author/Contributor list to the authors information section , rather than the header (leave just the one Editor).

2. Text is left justified

3. Abstract added

This document covers important materials and seems thorough and well-considered.  Here are some comments for your consideration and action.  Please 
address them, and if needed upload a further revision of this document.  Once that is done, we will advance it to 30-day public comment.

Fairly minor formatting changes requested:
1. Please move the Author/Contributor list to a Contributor section, rather than the header (leave just the one Editor).

2. It's nice that this is formatable as plain text.  Please reset the paragraph justification to left-justified (for ragged edges), rather than fully 
justified.

3. Please add an Abstract (see "GGF-Draft-Template" under the root category of the Gridforge Editor project).

A larger issue, which you might want guidance with, is that there is some unevenness in this document's use of English.  I did not try to apply edits 
for these language difficulties, but estimate there are about 200 small changes (mostly things like changing from singular to plural, or adding a word
 such as "the").  My advice is to look at #1-3 above immediately, then re-submit.  Then, while the document is in 30-day public comment, seek one or 
two RG members who can do a very careful edit of the language of the document.  That will make it much more enjoyable for future readers.

Once the 30-day public comment is over with, you will probably have some additional substantive comments concerning the technical content of the 
document.  But by addressing the language edits earlier, you will have far less work after the 30-day public comment, to get a final copy submitted 
for publication.

Please respond via this tracker or email if these ideas are unclear or if you disagree with them.  Thanks for this submission, and I'm looking forward
 to its publication.

Greg-

Please see previous comment from Peter Clarke

I have looked through this now.

It looks like a very interesting and coprehensive document which ought to be of interest to a sector fo the community.

It is reasonably well written, but I did feel that in several places (i) the English phrasing was not correct and (ii)
descriptions were too terse to be understood.

Frankly im not sure what GGF policy is on this, i.e. must all documents be "perfect english".   The GGF editor should rule on this.

I think it isa fine document, so either


A) If the GGF editor is in accord it can go out immediately for comment or
B) If the GGF editor says english should be perfect then I believe a member of the R-group (who has not been deeply involved in writing the document) 
should look over this again with a fresh eye.

MSWord Doc attached