Agenda

1. Quickly summarize points from last meeting.
   1. Gained a concensus on essential use case scenarios. Still need to provide some more details.
2. Begin review discussion of draft specification.

Minutes

Atendees: Alan Yeug, Ian Hancock, Jim Amsden, Jonathan Harclerode, Steve Abrams, Tom Piccoli

[ed: i appologize for not having detailed transcript like I usually do, the conversation was too intense for me this time.]

1. After reviewing the essential scenarios, and clarifying what they architecturally meant we began a discussion of the draft spec.
2. Jim A. began a discussion that essentially said that all the AM specs so far are really resource domain neutral, and that this should be a OSLC spec not an AM specific one. Jim C. agreed but said that each of the domains (and implementers) are on the hook to develop something in the 1.0 time frame (i.e. 2009) so that we can have some products using it in 2010. Once the broader OSLC 2.0 specs come out, we can refactor all this basic stuff and focus back on AM specific issues.
3. There was a general agreement that it was reasonable to manage links as independent resources (i.e. addressible via its own URI).
4. There was a long dicussion related to the <oslc_am:backlink> element in the link resource format. The general conclusion was to drop it, citing that it was an attempt to do to much with too many assumptions in the 1.0 time frame.

-- JimConallen - 15 Oct 2009