Mark, Dave, 
I just want to let you know I like the landscape document, especially sections 2 and 3. I have two recommendations: 
- expand on section 4, providing short examples of companies which are in the various phases of grid adoption (this 
could be done in collaboration with the enterprise function), highlighting the business value grids 
- make sure the landscape document and the technical strategy and roadmap document are well aligned in terms of grid 
types (there was a comment made that the taxonomy may need some revision since two grid types refer to the grid layout -
 cluster and data center - while the third one refers more to a usage pattern - collaboration). In any case, I would 
recommend to have the grid types (taxonomy) defined in the landscape document and 
referred to in the technical strategy and roadmap document. 

As far as the technical strategy and roadmap document goes, it would be good to qualify which grid capabilities are more
 relevant to each grid type, so as to better associate the expressed grid capability priorities to the 
grid types. In addition, my perception of the grid technical strategy and roadmap objective is really to steer the OGF 
activities. Therefore, the statement at the beginning of the document which says "The contents are not intended to 
restrict or direct activities within the OGF" is weak to me and diminishes the importance this document ought to have in
 the evolution of the OGF activities. I suggest to amend it to a stronger statement. 

Best regards,
Jean-Pierre Prost, Ph.D.