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
>
AssetHome
>
AssetMgMeetings
>
AssetMgMeetings28July2011
(02 Aug 2011,
SheehanAnderson
)
(raw view)
Date: Wednesday, 28 July 2011<br />Time: 10:00 AM Eastern<br />Contact [[GiliMendel][Gili Mendel]] if you'd like to participate. ---++++ *Agenda* * Discuss 2.0 supporting documents * What is the status of the use case and example documents? What needs to be completed? * Can we separate the [[http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCAssetManagement20Example][examples]] from the [[http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/AssetMgSpecificationV2Samples][samples]]? Currently there are examples mixed in the samples. * Review updates to the [[http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/AssetMgSpecificationV2#Asset][asset resource specification]]. * How do we include properties defined within a rdf:Description tag? See relationships for an example. ---++++ *Notes from Meeting* Minutes * Use cases * Supporting documents * Keep and update Asset Management Use Case and Asset Management Examples. * These documents should give examples of links between asset management, automation, and change management. * * Automation links occur during the build and deployment process. * Management of the build after it is deployed is an important part of the use case. We should show how change managements resources may be linked to a specific build. * Remove the Asset Resource Properties Overview. This table is now included in the specification. * Potentially merge all other supporting documents into the Asset Management Use Case and Asset Management Examples. * The Samples documentation should be more concise and not include a story. The Asset Management Examples section should describe the story. * Asset representation * Discussed whether we should use two properties or a blank node to represent an asset identification. * Blank node * Pros: ID and version are grouped, probably a more correct representation as the ID is not unique. Different versions of an asset share the same ID * Cons: More confusing to understand and consume * Two Properties * Pros: Easier to consume, understand * Cons: May be confusing as ID is not unique * We decided to go with two properties, oslc_asset:guid and oslc_asset:version. We will reserve dcterms:identification for a database ID if needed. Action Items: * Sheehan * Update asset identification repressentation * Start work on updating use case documents * Add automation and change management links to the asset representation * Contine to update the related asset and artifact properties. We will need to discuss these next week. * Gili * Update [[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jdKioqtZ-ZvrRc63DVzR8WXcxue4o6eGu4_cdE3XRvw/edit?hl=en_US to][OSLC Asset Management 2.0 Use Case]] to include information about links between Asset Management and Automation. ---++++ *Attendees* __IBM__ * Eric Bordeau * Gili Mendel * Kevin Bauer * Sheehan Anderson * Kevin Bauer
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 - 02 Aug 2011 - 14:36:14 -
SheehanAnderson
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