In general, I am very supportive of this document, as it provides valuable information.  However, I have a few detailed 
comments/recommendations:

1. Remove the notes scattered through the text (such as explaining the MUWS acronym, or fixing fonts).

2. Table 1 presents CIM as a resource level standard/interface.  The "interface" is really called "WBEM" (which includes
 CIM and defines its encodings).  Future WBEM releases will build on WSDM to define WS-CIM.  Also, CIM can (and should) 
be used for the mgmt of the OGSA infrastructure.  This allows a single mgmt interface for the resources and its mgmt.

3. It would be worhwhile to note that "control" is also known as "configuration".

4. In the list of CIM Schemas on pages 10-11, it would be valuable to add the following:
0 Application Server: Updates JSR77's CIM mapping, for managing the J2EE environment

5. Recommend including WS-CIM in Section 5.1.1.  WS-CIM is the means to convey CIM semantics/the CIM Schema using Web 
services.  It is intended to build on WSRF, WSN and WSDM.  You have this listed as a gap in Section 5.1.2.

6.  In Section 5.2.1, CIM has also defined the semantics behind a full RBAC model.  It is worth noting that the CIM 
semantics address the concepts in XACML and SAML today.

7. Wherever WSDM is mentioned in the gaps/issues analysis of Section 5, CIM should also be mentioned (or WS-CIM).  The 
reasoning is that WSDM is model agnostic but CIM provides a complete resource and service mgmt infrastructure.  Coupling
 the two leads to complete semantics AND rendering.

Andrea