OSLC Core Meeting September 1, 2010

Last week's meeting

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

• Action items from last week:
  • Do we know how to query for link labels?
    • http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/2010-August/000521.html

• Discuss how to finalize Link Guidance
  • Assign it a date or a version number?
  • Mark it as FINAL or as "in finalization"?
  • Lock it down so only 2-3 people can edit?

• Discuss possible next topics for workgroup
  • Partial Update and possible collaboration with W3C? SPARQL Protocol Working Group
  • Standardization of JSON format, e.g. for application/rdf+json and possible collaboration with existing Talis effort
  • Spec "backlog"
    • Attachments
    • Eventing
    • Baselining
    • Hierarchical URLs and "staging" URLs

• Implementation feedback?

Minutes

Attendees and notes from the meeting

Possible Attendees

• ArthurRyman
• ScottBosworth
• JimConallen
• SteveSpeicher
• IanGreen

Topics discussed

• Dave J: agenda - close link guidance, talk about future
• Scott B: are we in agreement on link label changes to OSLC-CM v2 spec?
  • http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2#Labels_for_Relationships
• Scott B: label is part of subject resource, not a cached value from object resource, best analogy is like a web bookmark -- browser suggests initial label for bookmark, usually the title of the page, but the user can change the label
• Arthur R: yes, the bookmark analogy works
• Jim C: I'm concerned that users will be confused by the labels, thinking that they are the real subject of the resource
• Arthur R and Scott B: that seems like a UI issue; a UI can show both the label and the subject title
• Jim C: yes, that is what our product does but other products may need guidance

• Scott B: query syntax does not make it convenient to query for a link label
• Steve S: why is query for link label a use case we need to support?
• Arthur R: Ian needs to be able to query for link labels
• Arthur R: we can add support to Query Syntax for this and it can be additive
• Dave J: do we need to document this shortcoming of query syntax?
• Scott B: I don't think so. Do we want to document every shortcoming of the query syntax.
• AI: Scott B : I will take a shot at creating a note for Link Guidance

• Dave J: how to finalize guidance? assign version number?
• Steve S: I like the W3C? process, which encodes a date into the URL of the guidance document
• Ian G: there is some spec in the Link Guidance, about the JSON format
• Scott B: if you follow the JSON guidance rules, would you get the JSON link label syntax
• Dave J: no, we would have to change the JSON guidance to represent link labels
• Arthur R: I don't like the JSON representation, why can't we add triples as we do in RDF/XML
• Scott B: need to be clear in representation guide on JSON representation of link labels
• Dave J: I agree, we need to fix this and make the JSON more RDF model friendly.
• Scott B: can we reconvene the Link Guidance group on JSON representation?
• AI : Dave J to rework JSON example and reconvene Link Guidance group to finalize.

• Dave J: what to do with remaining time. Talk about future topics?
• Ian G: do we need to address guidance on link label vocabulary?
• Scott B and others: We briefly discussed this before you joined and agree your proposed language is good:
  • http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/2010-August/000522.html

Finis