Subject: c548 review From: "Gregor von Laszewski" Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 19:43:21 -0500 To: "'Geoffrey Fox'" X-UIDL: a1b070d1300d0000 X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Received: by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (mbox gcfpc) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Mon Oct 15 21:51:08 2001) X-From_: fox@mailer.csit.fsu.edu Mon Oct 15 21:50:04 2001 Return-Path: Delivered-To: gcfpc@csit.fsu.edu Received: from dirac.csit.fsu.edu (dirac.csit.fsu.edu [144.174.128.44]) by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E9323A09 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 21:49:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost by dirac.csit.fsu.edu (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7) id VAA61290; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 21:49:55 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Message-Id: <200110160149.VAA61290@dirac.csit.fsu.edu> Delivered-To: fox@csit.fsu.edu Received: from mcs.anl.gov (cliff.mcs.anl.gov [140.221.9.17]) by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F2E123A09 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 20:44:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from BEAUTY (pitcairn.mcs.anl.gov [140.221.9.180]) by mcs.anl.gov (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA66100 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 19:44:02 -0500 Message-ID: <001001c155db$8f2240b0$bb7ba8c0@BEAUTY> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 In-Reply-To: <200110152304.TAA63118@dirac.csit.fsu.edu> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-To: Geoffrey Fox Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 21:49:55 -0400 Resent-From: Geoffrey Fox ------------------------------------------ C: Paper and Referee Metadata Paper Number C548: Date: Received 27 July 2001 Paper Title: A Web Services Data Analysis Grid Author(s): William A. Watson III , Ian Bird, Jie Chen, Bryan Hess, Andy Kowalski, Ying Chen Referee: Gregor von Laszewski Address: gregor@mcs.anl.gov Referee Recommendations. Please indicate overall recommendations here, and details in following sections. accepted provided changes suggested are made D: Referee Comments (For Editor Only) ------------------------------------ E: Referee Comments (For Author and Editor) ------------------------------ The authors describe their current efforts on the Lattice Portal. The paper could be improved by describing the JASMINE and JOBS system in a bit more detail. It would be necessary to include a comparison to systems like Legion, Globus, and more importantly Webflow, Mississippi portal, and UNICORE. The inclusion of such a chapter of related work would be academically appropriate. From the current paper it is not quite clear if the effort replicates features such as found in UNICORE. The description of the application and the scenario is nice. F: Presentation Changes Do not use gif images but vector Graphics. The images are unreadable. Based on a comparison with other efforts include appropriate refernces. I detected some minor spelling errors in the paper, I recommend another proofread. Figure 1 contradicts the text. In one Legion is used in the other Condor. .