INCOMPETE AND UNDER discussion
At OSLC the notion of relationship is central. Spec. to allow providers to surface relationship information in a RESTful manner.
Using OSLC Shape Resources to describe
An OSLC Resource which enumerates the OSLC Relationships that are configured for the service provider.
OSLC Link Properties | Type | Occurs | Extended Property? | Description |
---|---|---|---|---|
OSLC Relationships Resource | ||||
oslc:relationships | Resource of type oslc:Relationship | zero-or-more | no | Link to oslc:Relationship |
These properties are intended to be part of an OSLC Service resource to identify the relationships that exist between service providers.
Describes a relationship that exists to other OSLC service providers, and the OSLC Properties which are used to indicate the presence of such a relationship.
Prefixed Name | Data type | Occurs | Extended Property? | Title | Description![]() |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
dc:description | XMLLiteral | at-most-one | No | Description | Description of the relationship; this SHOULD include only content that is valid and suitable inside an XHTML <div> element. |
OSLC Common Properties HERE | |||||
OSLC Relationship Resource | |||||
oslc:inverse | Resource of type oslc:Property | exactly-one | No | Inverse | The OSLC Property that describes the inverse link. |
oslc:link | Resource of type oslc:Property | exactly-one | No | Link | The OSLC Property that describes the link. |
dc:title | XMLLiteral | at-most-one | No | Title | Title of the relationship; this SHOULD include only content that is valid inside an XHTML <span> element. |
Bringing the oslc:link an oslc:inverse together in a Relationship resource identifies the oslc:Properties as defining the relation - is this strong enough?
Should the description of a relationship include a description of the expected/supported OSLC Domains at either end? For example, oslc:domain and oslc:range? I don't like this idea because it leads to a brittleness in the linking, but we might want to discuss.
Some RmRelationshipExamples.