[Oslc-Automation] OSLC Actions: Action for resource that does not yet exist: worked example

[John Arwe]

Should  { <plans/1/results/67890> , oslc_auto:executes , 
<plans/1/future-stop> } be
                { <plans/1/results/67890> , 
oslc_auto:executesAutomationPlan        , <plans/1/future-stop> } in 2 
places?


When you say "the client knows", "The Automation Request was never created 
to be executed in this form by the provider - only to be downloaded to be 
submitted as a new Automation Request for executed later. However, the way 
in which other providers behave may vary.)", and so on, I do find myself 
asking "how?, in other words "based on what information?"  I can follow my 
nose through the steps (I think), but I'm not positive that my answers 
would match anyone else's ... that "knows X/how" set of statements feels 
like it needs capturing even though I find myself hesitant to say it Must 
be.
Maybe this is a simple matter of completeness though - I see you carefully 
leaving breadcrumbs in places before and after (e.g. in resource context 
for the execute-later case).

Bottom line, I could follow it.  It required careful reading in spots, but 
(given the two points in time, trying to link to resources not yet 
created, etc) I don't think we can completely stamp that out.

Taking a second pass, these are points where a breadcrumb might have been 
eaten by the crows.
1: "consumer is familiar with future actions, so it recognises that 
results that are generated by executing this deployment plan will have an 
action called “Tear down pattern 1”,"    Not seeing the formal definition, 
I'm not sure that I can follow my nose with respect to knowing where to 
look for the future action; we could define that, if need be.
2: "and it knows this is a teardown plan as it is of type oslc:StopAction" 
... not obvious how it knows that its 'teardown' specifically.  Shirley 
(via the Open World Assumption) not always, as currently written.  Maybe 
if you had a teardown type (in any ns).
3: "The consumer sees that there is a template dialog binding on the 
future action, and so knows that this action requires configuration" ... 
quibble: requires => likely accepts (and might require).
4: "The Automation Request was never created to be executed in this form 
by the provider " ... I think b/c of the oslc_auto:TemplateDialog
5: "is encoded in the creation factory URI" this is true; I'm tempted to 
change is => might be or "In this example, ..." since it's not required 
(could also be in a fixed body).
6: "As the Automation Request was created before the resource was 
deployed, the request does not contain any context information" ... "the" 
AutoReq, you have several - use its short URI, e.g. /56789?
7: "this new request to determine when the teardown has completed. When 
this new Automation Result " ... perhaps same as 6.

On the whole, for me, that's a pretty minor set of comments on something 
this complex.  [worries: did he miss something?]

Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-automation_open-services.net/attachments/20140128/bb51e174/attachment-0003.html>