[oslc] Oslc-Core post from shani at il.ibm.com requires approval

Kartik Kanakasabesan kartik at us.ibm.com
Thu Jan 26 08:22:41 EST 2012

Hello Uri,
        with respect to you comment 
>>>>>With S == "Specifications", "OSLC Specifications" becomes "Open 
Specifications for Lifecycle Collaboration Specifications", which is 
confusing again. 
I suggest S == "Solutions". 

I don't understand the confusion, it has always been OSLC, it was never 
intended to be OSLCS as you are referring it. Specifications has never 
been part of the nomenclature of the acronym. I believe solution fosters 
the notion of a product or a set of products which our community is not 
focussed on.

----- Message from Uri Shani <SHANI at il.ibm.com> on Thu, 26 Jan 2012 
11:47:01 +0200 -----
community at open-services.net, oslc-core at open-services.net
Re: [oslc] Reconsidering the "S" in OSLC
With S == "Specifications", "OSLC Specifications" becomes "Open 
Specifications for Lifecycle Collaboration Specifications", which is 
confusing again. 
I suggest S == "Solutions". 

- Uri 

From:        Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com> 
To:        community at open-services.net, oslc-core at open-services.net 
Date:        25/01/2012 11:27 PM 
Subject:        [oslc] Reconsidering the "S" in OSLC 
Sent by:        community-bounces at open-services.net 

As we all know "S" technically stands for "Services" in OSLC but what are 
these "Services"? In doing a little digging, the original intent of the 
name was to focus on REST and therefore the word "services" was introduced 

to represent "REST services". This has led to a number of problems with 
confusion over what kind of services are we talking about. For instance, 
there is a natural tendency to map the OSLC use of the word service with 
that of SOA (Service Oriented Architecture), which is not at all the 
association we want. Will this be a constant problem as OSLC expands into 
new domains and 3rd party adoption?  I believe so.

I'm proposing to fix the problem with "S" standing for "Services" and 
instead introduce "Specifications". So try this on for size,

   Open Specifications for Lifecycle Collaboration (OSLC)

Open Specifications is really what we want the focus to be out.  The 
technical approach and the basis on Linked Data quite important as well, 
but that is supported by the community's development of open 
specifications based on that technology.  I believe this is a necessary 
change and the right one. It captures what OSLC is really about. Yes, 
changing this provides a bit of short term pain but the longer we wait it 
will be harder to change and we'll have to continue to deal with the 
confusion it introduces.

Of course there are a number of logistics to consider with such a change:

   Fixing names used on websites, articles, charts, etc (like the title 
of this Community)
   Considering updating more complicated things like OSLC intro videos
   Considering a better domain name

Do you see this as being an issue worth addressing?
Do you have other suggestions for the letter "S"?
If no big issues, what timeframe would this change occur?  I believe the 
sooner the better.  I'd like to have a gauge on this by January 31st.

I (and the community) would be interested in hearing both support for 
this, as well as any concerns.  Feel free to reply to this email post 
and/or on the forums.

Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645

Community mailing list
Community at open-services.net

----- Message from oslc-core-request at open-services.net on Thu, 26 Jan 2012 
04:47:17 -0500 -----
confirm 4907d56e15ade5a90752a1165389dec06f6ba3af
If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact,
Mailman will discard the held message.  Do this if the message is
spam.  If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header
with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting
to the list.  The Approved: header can also appear in the first line
of the body of the reply.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/community_open-services.net/attachments/20120126/37fdb082/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Community mailing list