Agenda

1. Review the OSLC AM 2.0 Draft (OSLC Core 2.0 based) that Jim created.
2. Discuss appropriateness of this work group defining standards for RDF and simplified UML.

Minutes

Atendees: Clyde D Icuspit, Tom Piccoli, Bob Maksimchuk, Scott Bosworth, Sandeep Kohli, Jim Conallen

1. The workgroup reviewed the AM 2.0 Draft, and agreed that this should be our first specification.
2. Scott B. suggested that to be in alignment with the other specs, we should not require the production of a catalog document.
3. Regarding authentication, we should remove the requirement that at least one authentication mechanism be implemented. There may be cases where an AM server might not provide editable content and just server an an open library of AM resources.
4. Scott B. suggested we remove the comment on the production of RDF/XML in the summary table. This is a topic that even the core group is trying to avoid.
5. There was some discussion on making query a requirement. It was suggested that at least one form of resource discovery be present (query capability or delegated UI selector).
6. This work group originally stated that Atom would be the response type for queries. The core requires RDF/XML minimally for all response types, and provides some guidance on query responses. It was suggested that we might forget the Atom response, and just go with the Core required RDF/XML.