Paper Number:  C465

Paper Title: The Software Architecture of  a Distribute PSE

Author(s):  D.W. Walker, et al


Referee:  Mark Baker

Address:  c/o University of Portsmouth, Mercantile House, Portsmouth, PO1 
2EG

email:  Mark.Baker@computer.org

Signature:

Referee Recommendations:
     
	1) Publish as is...
XXXX	2) Accept provided changes suggested are made
	3) reject

E:  Referee's Comments (For Editor Only) - Paper number:  C465
 
This is an excellent paper that provides a well-written introduction and 
description of a prototype distributed PSE.

F:  Referee's Comments (For Author and Editor) - Paper Number:  C465

This is an excellent paper that provides a well-written introduction and 
description of a prototype distributed PSE.

I have a few minor comments:

o It may be worth considering adding some thoughts on PSE security, FT, 
QoS in the discussion and summary section.
o Page 3, point 7, change “its input and machine, communication…” to “its, 
input, machine, communication…”
o Page 3, section 2.1, paragraph starting “There are several ways”. I would 
suggest that you change “compiled for a target architecture” to “prepared 
for a…”
o Page 5, paragraph 2, swap “also can” for “can also”
o Page 12, paragraph 1, “vetoable” is there such a word?
o Page 12, paragraph 2, last sentence, should be “A simple…”
o Page 12, paragraph starting,  “The script…” probably reads better with 
“specify what method” rather than “specify the method”!
o Page 14, section 3.1, first paragraph, change “ie” to “i.e.,”
o Page 19, section 4.5, first paragraph, “pre-existing”, why not just 
“existing”?
o Page 19, section 4.5, first paragraph, change “that possess” to “that often 
possess” – not all legacy codes are as stated.
o Page 19, section 4.5, first paragraph, I suggest you list the points on 
individual lines.
o Page 21, section 5.3.1 first paragraph, surely the Java IDL is not a 
CORBA ORB! It is a CORBA compliant IDL!
o Some words about how you debug and profile applications via the PSE 
would probably be a good idea.