perfsonar development work

["Michael Bischoff" <>]

Hello Verena,

> I'm sorry to say that, but you are missing the point.
undoubtedly,

> We still do not argue
> about the sensefullness and interpetation of test results.
We are just going to implement something without establishing its usefulness,
or sensefulness rather, is that seriously what your trying to say? We are just
going to blindly implement things. This does clear up other questions I was 
having.

> All you want to achieve is possible
Simplicity; or are you seriously going to claim that the other proposal is is 
equal or less
complex?

I have given counter arguments to all the reasons or provided an alternative 
solution.

Away if you think this is the way forward, then I shouldn't be in your way 
I'm not an end
user nor am I responsible for it.

Good luck,

Michael.


> Hi Michael,
>
>
> I'm sorry to say that, but you are missing the point. We still do not argue
> about the sensefullness and interpetation of test results. All you want to 
> achieve is possible
> with the syntax proposed by Jason and me. As you did nothing to improve the 
> syntax (sorry,
> but your examples are syntactically not working), I'm going to close this 
> discussion and
> finalize the schema.
>
> Verena
>
>
> Am Dienstag, 24. Juni 2008 18:58 schrieb Michael Bischoff:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>> See http://wiki.perfsonar.net/jra1-wiki/index.php/Talk:Service_Self-testing
>>
>>
>> regards, Michael
>>
>