Agenda

Updates on Action Items

• Recent changes to the spec., Link Guidance, issues
• Move to enter finalization
• Implementation progress - unconfirmed
  • Rational (DOORS, DOORS RP)
  • Tieto is implementing OSLC RM.
• Legal
  • Please complete paperwork at RmSpecificationCovenantV2 in accordance with the OSLC Ts&Cs.

Minutes

Apologies:DominicTulley PaulMcMahan, AndyBerner, DaveJohnson, IanGreen, , NicolasKruk, ScottBosworth, JimConallen, IngridJørgensen, SimonWills, BrendaEllis,

Attendees: AndyBerner, DominicTulley

Minutes:

attribute is initiator of the action; does test case affirm or deny; attributes on link; justification; relationships need to have a "shape"; Is making link properties a MUST too strong? Agreed that links having properties is a core OSLC RM need, so that we are right to use MUST here. Dominic: suggest that providers declare what properties they will use when showing a link in a UI.

Provider MUST accept dcterms:title (creator, modified, any others?) Does OSLC RM want to define the meaning of other properties. Don't want it to be a bit bucket.

Agreement that their should be a dcterms:title, but title does not make sense on alink. dcterms:description would be a better term.

Should we make sure that the link title is not the object title - this is not expected or intended?

Strong feeling that non-read-only properties are unrelated to the object. specifically, the title of thelink has nothing to do with the title of the object.

General agreement that ready to take the spec. to finalization. Email to the workgroup required to get wider approval (Labour day today, so US/CA not present.)