[Oslc-Automation] Action resources - implementation patterns

[Martin P Pain]

I haven't looked through the "resources" section apart from the section on 
"action types", so I don't know if that is up-to-date or not.



Kind regards,

Martin Pain
Software Developer - Green Hat
Rational Test Virtualization Server, Rational Test Control Panel
Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration - Automation WG joint chair

E-mail: martinpain at uk.ibm.com
Find me on:  and within IBM on:  




IBM United Kingdom Limited
Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU



From:   Martin P Pain/UK/IBM
To:     Martin P Pain/UK/IBM at IBMGB, 
Cc:     oslc-automation at open-services.net, "Oslc-Automation" 
<oslc-automation-bounces at open-services.net>
Date:   20/12/2013 16:26
Subject:        Re: [Oslc-Automation] Action resources - implementation 
patterns


I have finished making the large changes that I plan to make for now to 
the Actions 2.0 spec [1].

The interaction patterns have been split up to simplify each individual 
one. There is now very little extension going on between them, as the 
different plain (non-automation) HTTP ones don't share anything in common 
about how you construct the body.

The main description section has been updated to reflect the current 
thinking on patterns and profiles.

Aside from the issues page [2] and the TODOs in the spec, there are still 
some themes that need addressing:

* Wording - some of the wording could be clearer, especially in the 
  newer text. Some text doesn't use normative language when perhaps it 
  should and some uses it when perhaps it shouldn't. Consistency in 
  capitalisation. These are all editorial changes. 

* Making sure that the normative text is applied to the right things - 
  e.g. is it that the provider MUST or that the actions/bindings MUST. 
  Also making sure the conditions on the normative text is correct. 
  Currently the profiles make it sound like they are imposing their 
  "additional constraints" on all bindings of a provider, when it is 
  really just a minimum of one binding per action. 

* Terminology. I believe the main terminology is now more stable after 
  yesterday's meeting, but some of the lesser terms (e.g. "secondary 
  binding") might still need some thought and clarity. 

* Redundancy - there is a fair amount of overlap between the overview 
  and description sections. Perhaps the overview ought to follow a 
  specific example, with reference to the points that can be generalised, 
  then the description section have the normative generalised text. (I'll 
  add this as an issue in the issues list) 


That should be all the edits I'll be making before Christmas, except 
perhaps going over the TODOs and taking out ones that no longer apply. 
Feel free to read, comment, edit, etc.

Thanks,
Martin

[1] 
http://open-services.net/wiki/core/Exposing-arbitrary-actions-on-RDF-resources/
[2] http://open-services.net/wiki/core/Actions-2.0-Issues/

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-automation_open-services.net/attachments/20131220/ddf6b110/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 518 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-automation_open-services.net/attachments/20131220/ddf6b110/attachment.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1208 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-automation_open-services.net/attachments/20131220/ddf6b110/attachment-0001.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 360 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-automation_open-services.net/attachments/20131220/ddf6b110/attachment.gif>