Implementation Considerations. The parties agree to collaborate on moving toward implementation of this agreement as soon as possible. This agreement supersedes The IGeLU's Product Development Cooperation Agreement with Ex Libris (of August 22, 2006). The “Agreement between Ex Libris and ICAU concerning the cooperation in Aleph500 Development" (2004) will be updated according to this agreement.
Implementation Considerations. Vocabularies and categorization schemes could be published on the Web my making sure that all terms (e.g., xxxx://xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxx.xx/vocab/address) and concepts (e.g., xxxx://xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxx.xx/categories/ManualEntry) carry dereferencable IRIs. This allow clients to browse available terms and categories online and to automatically verify attribution tag categories before exchanging them with others. A simple, straightforward way is to follow the implementation of xxxxxx.xxx, which is a generic schema for structured data on the Internet. More advanced implementations could follow the Linked Data principles [BHB09]. Our proposed data sharing model suggests that authenticity and integrity of attribution tags can be achieved by computing hashes and digital signatures over a tag and all its contextually relevant attributes. However, for a data exchange purpose, this would require a precise and agreed-upon definition of the hash computation and digital signature procedures, which could be defined as part of a larger standardization effort. Alternatively, one could use existing GIT infrastructures for storing and publishing attribution tags. Git has its origin in distributed software development and is now the de- facto standard for publishing and tracking changes in source code files. It automatically creates hashes over each file and allows users to digitally sign their contents after each commit. Git is increasingly used for sharing smaller and even large datasets (GIT LFS). Therefore, we believe that it could also be used for sharing JSON-LD serializations of attribution tags.
Implementation Considerations. The above CA modes are designed to incur minimal burden on the existing net- work infrastructure and elements. Here, I investigate some of the main consider- ations and design objectives for incorporating CA into the future releases. The feasibility of CA in UL is not always as straightforward as the DL case. The overhead burden on power-limited terminals in the UL due to CA makes the gains achievable less promising. In addition to the elevated terminal power consumption and increased control signalling that arise from utilising multiple CCs, there are other factors that network operators will need to account for. Considering the different radio channel characteristics of CCs at different carrier frequencies and hence different path losses and Doppler shifts, non-contiguous CA in LTE-A requires RRM and radio network planning algorithms to account for such differences [21]. Non-contiguous allocation of CCs additionally requires multiple RF and Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) units [18].
Implementation Considerations. The design consideration of the SLARMS are the follow- ing: • Support for dynamic customer requests: When there is a customer updating the request, the request monitor will be triggered to detect request changes and go through the decision making process. •
Implementation Considerations. Table 4.1: The conceptual effect of grain size. Large grain size (nTasks nCores) Speedup bounded by tasks (not sufficient parallelism) Right grain size Good speedup Small grain size (nTasks nCores) Spawn and scheduling overhead (reduces performance)
