OSLC Core Meeting September 8, 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:
  • Re-assess JSON representation guidance in light of Link Guidance
    • http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreLinksDRAFT
    • http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecAppendixRepresentations
  • Proposal: add the following to the JSON representation guidance:
  • "1.3.2 If the resource reference is part of an Anchor (as described in Link Guidance) and has annotating property values, then include these properties within the JSON object."

Things we did not get to last week:

• 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

Attendees

• JimConallen
• ArthurRyman
• ScottBosworth
• NickCrossley
• SteveSpeicher

Topics discussed

First, we had a short discussion about tracking issues:

• Steve S: how do we ensure issues raised on mailing list get into the spec?
• Dave J: we need to establish an issues page
• Scott B: why not add a "Finalization" section to the existing issues page?
• Steve S: resource shapes, list of allowed values wrong in Core spec and right. See email
• AI: Dave J to establish new Finalization issues section of existing issues page
• AI: Dave J to review mail list and ensure issues are accounted for
• AI: Steve S to review mail list and ensure issues are accounted for

Then we discussed the JSON representation shown in Link Guidance

• Dave J: see the Link Guidance example #4 and the Representation Guidance rules for JSON

We discussed the format and agreed that it us not well-suited for representing arbitrary RDF. We also agreed that instead of fixing our JSON representation, we should work with the wider community (at W3C? ?) to device a true standard for JSON RDF. We also realized that our existing guidance has some problems. We'd like to fix these problems by:

• Allowing rdf:type to be multi-valued because resources can be of multiple values
• Removing the oslc:qname property entirely
• AI : Steve S to assess the implementation impact of these changes

We agreed that the proposed way to represent Anchors in JSON is good enough but we need more/better examples.

• AI: add some new examples that show multiples subscriptions and multiple link properties

At the close of the meeting we had a brief exchange about what's next for the workgroup and Dave J pointed out that there is a list of possible topics (above) in the agenda for this meeting. Please read it and comment or add your own suggestions.

The End.