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
.
TWiki
>
Main Web
>
RmHome
>
RmMeetings
>
RmMeetings20110822
(22 Aug 2011,
IanGreen
)
(raw view)
Agenda * Desire for OSLC RM scenarios covering elaboration of business requirements (see RmElaborationBusinessRequirements) * Are business requirements RM resources? * Desire for RM-to-RM scenarios * Satisfaction, Decomposition, etc. * Structure of requirements <br />Apologies: DominicTulley Attendee: VishyRamaswamy, PaulMcMahan Minutes Relationships between artefacts between resources of the same type (rm-to-rm). Also is a resource almost always local, or remote. In QM, resources are "same provider". QM is thinking about QM-to-QM - also. How would query be affected? Query for all failing test executions - no way to describe what is missing - some results would be in different providers and so not presented. What kinds of changes are permitted, with what kinds of specification change? What would we need to say, if anything, about intra-domain dual links? How would a client know which links to explicitly create and which are "automagically" created by the provider. As we bring multiple domains together, static linkage will not scale. We need user-defined links will be desirable, if not required. The semantics of such a link need not be relevant from a user point of view - all they want is to have named relationships. The ability to create new oslc:Property resources would allow a more flexible/dynamic linking mechanism. Vishy. FocalPoint scenario - business needs, and then requirements are used to elaborate those business needs. The creation factories create resources in the "wrong" place; the creation factories do not admit parameters to "place" the created resource, nor do they allow the created resource to have other application properties like folders, tags etc. Paul reports that RQM had similar issues consuming the RRC RM provider. RQM also has categories - something between folder and tag. Categories are not surfaced on the RQM OSLC QM resources. There may be a "common" categorization that could be shared across all the applications (bulk creation, query, etc.) There is the "extensions to OSLC" approach, and/or the "private API" which is separate from OSLC.
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r1
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
Ra
w
edit
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r1 - 22 Aug 2011 - 15:47:49 -
IanGreen
Main
Main Web
Create New Topic
Index
Search
Changes
Notifications
RSS Feed
Statistics
Preferences
Webs
Main
Sandbox
TWiki
Български
Cesky
Dansk
Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
日本語
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Svenska
简体中文
簡體中文
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