(7) - May provide - accepted. 
(7) - must fulfil - accepted = but nothing has been added to the text, as this is an informational comment. 

(8) may provide - 
* collaboration - accepted. but this is an informational comment. 
* machine readability - accepted. Added a footnote in teh text. 

(8) must fulfill  - accepted. added text to the document.

-----------------
(7) Grid Workflow
-----------------

MAY PROVIDE:

*Service Descriptions: For the job workflow scenario in [7.2.2] it will be beneficial if individual services provide a 
more exacting definition of their interface (e.g. "INPUT: LSID" rather than "INPUT:String"). It is common knowledge that
 most services currently do a very bad job of this (cf. "XSD:Any"). Work is taking place for semantic web services (cf. 
OWL-S) that would aid this scenario.

*Discovery: related to service descriptions is the question of discovery. The semantic web group also has experience in 
this field. [7.2.3]

MUST FULFILL:

*Workflow as GridService: the use case document states that all workflows should be seen as grid services. This implies 
that they should provide FindServiceData() and possibly notification facilities. We should make sure that the 
GridService/WS-RF metadata facilities work well with the Semantic web service facilities. [7.2]

NOTE: I think there is much experience in Taverna and other projects that would benefit use case 7, though this should 
most likely be done under the auspices of the wfm-rg.
  
-------------------
(12) VO Grid Portal
-------------------

MAY PROVIDE:

*Collaboration: Implementations from the CoAKTing project may fulfill requirements in the portal scenario. We might 
examine writing this up as a (partial) reference implementation. [12.3]

*Machine-readability: There are cases where the VO portal may act as proxy between non-grid and grid resources. This may
 be a key area for the semantic grid-RG: making semantic web technologies interoperable with grid technologies over such
 portals. This will require sufficient explicit definitions of capabilities, structure, terminology, etc. [12.8]

MUST FULFILL:

*Collaboration: If CoAKTing, etc. are to play a role, the security issues must be well addressed. In particular, a VO 
might have a dynamic nature with ever-changing permissions on resources. A sufficient description language must exist 
and be in place. [12.7]

NOTE: High-level services as mentioned in [12.9] are a possible link to SAGA-RG