This wiki is locked. Future workgroup activity and specification development must take place at
our new wiki
. For more information, see
this blog post about the new governance model
and
this post about changes to the website
.
TWiki
>
Main Web
>
RmHome
>
RmMeetings
>
RmMeetings20110307
(08 Mar 2011,
IanGreen
)
(raw view)
Meeting 7th March 2011 Agenda * Outsdanding Action items: * Feedback from JimConallen is oslc.properties being REQUIRED is acceptable to his implementation effort. (Now closed.) * IanGreen has completed the RDFS vocabulary and shared this with the community. Recommendation to publish this to open-services.net. * IanGreen continued soliciting IP covenant declarations. * Agree that RDFS vocabulary is ready to publish (see RmSpecificationVocabularyV2)? * Requirements Organization discussion * I'd like us to review Andy's document. In it he makes some assertions - for eample, that a requirement should reference the folder which contains it (should a requirement change when it is moved to another folder?) Should we deal with requirement ordering? For example, how would a Report (via OSLC Reporting) over a specification be possible? Attendees: IanGreen, SteveSpeicher, DaveJohnson, DominicTulley, SimonWills Apologies: ScottBosworth, AndyBerner Steve: Change to XSL should be shared back to core. Preference is for consistency across the CORE. Ian can suggest/propoe a change on the core mailing list. Ian - could we refactor the spec but we can do that later. Dominic: typo. in specifiedBy specification. needs to be reviewed. Action on Ian to make sure this happens. Simon: how do we deal with application scenarios in which clients want to do "more" than basic clients. Dominic - we can use existing types to capture heading/requirement distinction Dave - we talked about more than one hierarchy - the section/subsection, or do we need just groupings of a single type? Simon: people use headings in a variety of ways. It is not easy to anticipate how users are going to use these capabilities? We have two distinct things - tree of things and things. Links alone don't give orderedness. There are more degrees of freedom that we need - (trees not graphs). Simon: hierarchy is resource type agnostic. Folder is just another kind of ordered hierarchy. Hierarchy resource can be composed. Action on Ian to refine the straw man proposal.
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r3
<
r2
<
r1
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
Ra
w
edit
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r3 - 08 Mar 2011 - 09:09:27 -
IanGreen
Main
Main Web
Create New Topic
Index
Search
Changes
Notifications
RSS Feed
Statistics
Preferences
Webs
Main
Sandbox
TWiki
Български
Cesky
Dansk
Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
日本語
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Svenska
简体中文
簡體中文
Copyright � by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our
Terms of Use
Ideas, requests, problems regarding this site?
Send feedback