OSLC Core Meeting November 3, 2010

Last week's meeting

Link to OSLC Core spec: OslcCoreSpecification

Meeting logistics

See the OslcCoreMeetings for more information, more dial-in numbers and on-line meeting information.

• Conference Access
  • Toll free: 1-866-423-8350
  • Toll: 1-719-387-8273
• Participant passcode: 558663

Online meeting:

• For IBM employees, use the following link:
  https://lli.ibm.com/meeting/join/?schedid=4446009 (IBM intranet authentication required)

• For people outside IBM, use the following link:
  https://apps.lotuslive.com/meetings/join?id=4446009

Agenda

Review actions taken since last meeting

• AI Dave: propose way to mark sections as normative and informative. Proposal is to add these terms to the OSLC Core Spec glossary and then mark sections as "(this section is informative)" or "(this section is normative)".
  • Normative. Setting forth requirements that must be met to establish conformance with this standard; or providing recommendations or optional courses of action. For recommended or optional features, conformance is not dependent on the fact of implementation, but, if implemented, that implementation is as prescribed in this standard. Contrast with informative. Notes within a normative section may be informative.
  • Informative. Supplying background or explanation. Contrast with Normative.
• I've already added markings to many parts of the document and made small tweaks to places where we us non-normative language like "can" or "are expected to"

Other issues

Some issues found in recent reviews:

• Do we really want DateTime to be ISO 8601 (what we use now) vs. RFC-3339 (what Atom uses)?
  • We're currently using the XSD DateTime
  • RFC-3339 is a profile of ISO 8601, used by Atom
  • Nice post on 3339 vs. 8601: http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg13103.html
  • Dave's opinion: stick with 8601
• Explain term "property tree pattern" in oslc.properties section
  • Dave's opinion: Would be nice to have better words or an explanation
• Mention escaping in oslc.properties section?
  • It's only in the Query Syntax section
  • Dave's opinion: add informative note in oslc.properties section, refer to escaping defined in query syntax
• Need to say size hints MUST use CSS 2.1 in UI Delegates section?
  • Dave's opinion: probably safe to say MUST here
• IRI vs. URI, should we state that IRIs may be used wherever URIs are used?
  • Dave's opinion: too late to require any implementations to support IRIs, but need need a plan

Minutes

Attendees and notes from the meeting

Attendees

• DaveJohnson
• ScottBosworth
• SteveSpeicher

Topics discussed

• Marking sections as informative vs. normative
  • Dave AI: mark as informative only sections which could be mistaken as normative
  • Dave AI: explain in glossary that normative text includes terms like MUST, MAY, etc. and informative does not

• Dave AI: link to Creation Factory section in the Resource Creation section

• Dave AI: in oslc.properties section, reword and replace phrase "property tree pattern"
  • Instead of "match" use "to include in response"

• Dave AI: in sections that mention CSS 2.1, use the word MUST, UI Preview spec too.

• Dave AI add UI Preview to Core spec outline, with reference to external doc