OSLC Core Meeting July 14, 2010

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

Agenda

Recent changes to OSLC Core spec (http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecDRAFT)

• Change to RDF/XML representation guidelines:

An OSLC service MUST provide RDF/XML representations of all OSLC Defined Resources. For each resource, an OSLC service may offer either an abbreviated RDF/XML subset that is XML-tool friendly, a full RDF/XML or both forms according to these rules:

• When an OSLC client asks for RDF/XML by using content-negotiation to request content-type application/rdf+xml, then the client MUST accept any valid RDF/XML and the server MAY return either full RDF-XML or Abbreviated RDF/XML as defined below.
• When an OSLC client asks for XML by using content-negotiation to request content-type application/xml, then the server MUST return XML and MAY return abbreviated RDF/XML as defined below.
• When an OSLC client requests application/xml and the server only provides full RDF/XML then the server SHOULD return an HTTP status of 406 (Not Acceptable).

(also added text about configuring Jena for abbreviated RDF/XML and a how to generate full RDF/XML, i.e. see the spec)

Finalization plans

• Next week on July 21 we:
  • Declare the OSLC Core spec to be in finalization
  • Remove the word DRAFT from the spec and URLs
  • We allow only corrections and clarifications to the spec
  • We encourage our currently converging specs to finalize
  • We wait to declare the spec "final" when implementations are compete

Minutes

Notes from the meeting...

Attendees

• Mike Loeffler
• Robert Elves
• Nick Crossley
• Paul MacMahan?
• Jim Conallen
• Steve Speicher
• Scott Bosworth
• ArthurRyman

Topics discussed

Need for common properties, some of which are required across all resources

Missing properties in Appendix A common properties

Existance of two Common properties lists: appendix A which will be frozen with the Core and a separate Common properties document that is a living registry of common properties

Problem: we have two lists of common properties and we only need one, the living one

AI: Dave to move merge common properties into one list

Then discussed changes to Core spec re: application/rdf:xml and application/xml

Opposition to returning error when client requests application/xml and server can only return application/rdf+xml

Arthur raised the issue that the subset is bad idea because 1) RDF/XML is well known enough now and parsing it is not a burden and 2) the subset is not well specified enough to be a real format and thus will lead to brittle implementaitons.

AI: Dave to come up with alternative proposal before next meeting

Did not get to the topic of finalization and considering the RDF/XML discussion we are not ready to finalize.