[sem-grd] OGSA Use cases

[Joshua Moore <j.moore@dkfz-heidelberg.de>]

All-

at GGF11, thanks to D. Snelling, we decided to look into the OGSA use 
cases document to see where the semantic grid might aid and abet the 
OGSA effort. I took numbers 7 and 12. Here is a first attempt at a 
summary (I provide this online because I think we need to discuss just 
what information we want to provide to the OGSA-WG):

---[posted]----------------------------------------------------

-----------------
(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

----------------------------------------------------------------

Best wishes,
Josh

PS please remember David's request to add a comment at the gridforge 
site. I've started a thread at: 
https://forge.gridforum.org/forum/forum.php?thread_id=565&forum_id=411