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.

Date: Sep 30 2009

Agenda:

  • Follow up on review comments from previous meeting
    • Reworded language about handling ETag header?
    • Handling of namespace prefixes in selective properties?
      • Reversal of position on prescribed namespace prefixes
      • Lack of standard for compact representation of QName
    • Added query support
      • Quality Management Query Syntax?
      • Collections? (for query results)
      • Pagination?
  • Draft specifications
    • Quality Management REST API?
    • QM service discovery & description?
    • Quality Management Resource Definition?
    • Quality Management Query Syntax?
    • Delegated Resource Selection and Creation (no draft available yet)
  • Proposed schedule for 1.0 deliverables

Minutes:

Attendees: IngridJorgensen, JimConallen, ScottBosworth, PaulMcMahan, MikeSaylor, FarizSaracevic? , SteveAbrams, PaulMcMahan

  • Reviewed recent changes/tweaks to REST API?
    • Query API and selective properties support now require predefined XML namespace prefixes (reversal from previous position)
    • It would be helpful for the spec to clarify where these predefined prefixes are used
    • Discussions about OSLC Common specifications are underway. QM is interested in participating in this discussion and adopting these common specs when they are ready.
    • Q: How much has QM REST API drifted from CM REST API? A: Hardly at all. The main difference is QM spec does not include JSON.
  • QM query syntax based on CM V1 query syntax spec except full text search
    • Concerns raised about lack of full text search support
    • Paul to investigate full text support
  • The testplan and testcase resource definitions only contain basic properties from Dublin Core
    • This is intentional for V1 spec. Future versions of the spec are expected to add more QM specific properties
    • Q: Should the resource definitions contain any properties related specifically to requirements so that the use cases are properly covered? A: The Multi-valued properties? portion of the REST API spec satisfies the use case but in a generic way. A future version of the resource spec may add properties that describe the cross-OSLC relationships more concretely.

Edit | Attach | Print version | History: r6 < r5 < r4 < r3 < r2 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions...
Topic revision: r4 - 01 Oct 2009 - 18:14:56 - PaulMcMahan
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform 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