Comments on SkyNodeInterface PR

[Wil O'Mullane]

Availability is must in SupportInterfaces - we should not repeat that here.
THe ref is to the older version of the doc (name changed) will update this
wil
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 12:51:56PM +0200, Inaki Ortiz wrote:
> Mashatoshi,
> 
> Fair enough. If we just want to support the Availability interface
> described in the IVOA Support Interfaces Version 0.21 we should
> 
> REMOVE
> 
> - Paragraph on page 4, QI-1
> "SkyNodes shall implement the services outlined in the standard
> interfaces specification [STDIF]"
> 
> - Reference on page 9
> [STDIF] IVOA Grid & Web Services Working Group; Standard Interfaces;
> http://www.ivoa.net/internal/IVOA/IvoaGridAndWebServices/StandardInterfaces-0.1.pdf
> 
> and INCLUDE
> 
> another paragraph stating that the Availability interface is a MUST. 
> 
> As you say, the document should be included in the list of references
> available on page 9 then.
> (http://www.ivoa.net/internal/IVOA/IvoaGridAndWebServices/VOSupportInterfaces-0.21.pdf)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> --
> Iñaki
> 
> On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 19:18, Masatoshi OHISHI wrote:
> > Hi Inaki,
> > 
> > I think we should keep using GetAvailability since this is developed
> > in the Grid/WebServices WG. See VOSupportInterface-0.22.pdf and
> > availability.xsd in the GS/WS group area.
> > 
> > Anyway we need to describe the reference explicitly, although these
> > aren't standardized ones yet.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> >    Masatoshi
> > 
> >  >1. Implementation of Standard Interface (page 4, QI-1)
> >  >------------------------------------------------------
> >  >
> >  >The specification forces to implement interfaces outlined in the WD
> >  >Standard Interface v1.0: "MetaData", "MetaDataChangeOn", "HeartBeat" and
> >  >"HarvestLog". The SkyNode-v1.0.wsdl file wraps some of these services
> >  >(not all of them) in a common interface so called "GetAvailability".
> >  >
> >  >If the Standard Interface is a MUST we have to include all these
> >  >services in the WSDL file as the Standard Interfaces document suggest on
> >  >page 2, paragraph 2.1 and get rid of the GetAvailability.
> >  >
> >  >Nonetheless I believe that implementing the Standard Interface is a bit
> >  >too much. As far as I know none on the fully operational SkyNodes do it
> >  >and this requirement has been present since the very beginning in the
> >  >SkyNode Interface specification.
> >  >
> >  >Is the GetAvailability enough for the time being? If so we should state
> >  >it clearly in the specification.
> > 
> >