|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hiro Kishimoto: 01/30/2007 12:51 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
section 4.1.3 explained revised scenario how JM works. It is simpler than before eventhough JM still rewrites JSDL document.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
Closed set to 01/30/2007
Status changed from Fixed to Closed
|
|
|
Andreas Savva: 12/08/2006 4:23 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
Confirmed that this was not stated as a requirement. Also added a note that there may be another (unspecified) service that carries out such
refinement.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
Status changed from Resolved to Fixed
|
|
|
Andreas Savva: 12/07/2006 8:40 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
Make sure it is stated as a suggestion.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
Assigned To set to Andreas Savva
Status changed from Pending to Resolved
|
|
|
Andreas Savva: 09/08/2006 5:35 AM EDT
|
| |
Comment: |
- The group discusses A Grimshaw's question why there is a requirement that the
JSDL document needs be rewritten by the JM
- Andrew Grimshaw: The various services involved in EMS should -
if needed - rewrite the submitted JSDDL document in order to get
it closer and closer to the actual execution. It should be the
responsibility of the service to rewrite according to the
service it offers, and not by another entity that then ought to
understnad what that service did
- A Grimshaw proposes to introduce RNS names to EMS, particularly
section 4.2
- There is still controvercy on this issue, and more advanced scenarios
will attempt to solve this issue.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
Status changed from Open to Pending
|
|
|
|
