[Oslc-Automation] Minor comments to OSLC Automation 2.1

[Martin P Pain]

My responses/proposals are below. Where I have proposed changes (2, 3 & 4) 
could any workgroup members +1 them or suggest improvements. If no 
objections or improvements have been heard within a week, I'll consider 
them approved.

> (1) Property "oslc_auto:usesExecutionEnvironment": Assuming an Auto Plan 
as
> more than one execution environments. If such a plan is executed (-> 
Auto
> Request), how will the Service Provider know in which environment the 
Auto
> Plan should be executed? I assume
> one solution is to specify this as an InputParameter, but maybe it would 
be
> good to mention this in this properties description?

I think Umberto will have to respond to this one

> (2) Property "oslc:futureAction": In the description it says "..will 
become
> available on Auto Results that execute this Plan...". Is this correct?
> Doesn't an Auto Request execute the Auto Plan and the Auto Result only
> represents the state (and final results) of this execution?

I propose changing "Auto Results that execute this Plan" to "Auto Results 
that result from execution of this Plan", to make it a bit clearer.
 

> (3) "Resource: Dialog": I think this part is new in Auto 2.1, and I 
don't
> understand why this resource is only for deferred-execution. As far as I
> understood the immediate-execution should be also available via a 
dialog,
> so why isn't this described here at this point as well or split up into
> "Resource: Deferred Exec Dialog" and "Resource: Immediate Exec Dialog"?

That is a bit confusing, you're right. Only the last property in the table 
is specific to deferred execution dialogs - I believe the rest apply to 
all of them.

I propose changing the introduction to that resource shape to from:
"A deferred-execution creation dialog describes a delegated user interface 
(UI) which can be used to allow a user to interactively create a new 
Automation Request that is not immediately available for execution. 
Dialogs in general are defined by OSLC Core 2.0, and re-used here."

to say:
"Dialogs in general are defined by OSLC Core 2.0, and this specification 
defines two specific types of dialogs: the _immediate-execution creation 
dialog_, which can be used to allow a user to interactively create a new 
Automation request which is immediately available for execution, and the 
_deferred-execution creation dialog_, which create a new Automation 
Request that is not immediately available for execution, but which 
requires further work on the part of the consumer. "

Also for the description for the "oslc:usage" property in that shape to be 
changed from:
"An identifier URI for the domain specified usage of this dialog, for 
example a deferred execution creation dialog. It is likely that the target 
resource will be an oslc_auto:DeferredExecution but that is not 
necessarily the case"

to say:
"An identifier URI for the domain specified usage of this dialog. For 
example, for a deferred execution creation dialog this will be 
oslc_auto:DeferredExecution."

And change this line in the table:
"Core 2.0 Actions-defined Properties added to Dialog by Automation"

to say:
"Core 2.0 Actions-defined Properties added to Dialog by Automation - only 
used by the _deferred-execution creation dialog_."

And also append this text to the end of the "oslc:binding" property's 
description on that shape:
"This property is only used by the _deferred-execution creation dialog_."


> (4) Section "OSLC Actions and Automation / Discovering actions that will 
be
> executable after an Auto Requ completes": Text says "...If the Auto 
Request
> resulted in a new resource being created". -> Wouldn't be a "If the
> execution of an Auto Plan through/ by and Auto Request resulted in a new
> resource..."?

The terminology's a little loose here. In a sense the Request does get 
"executed", which consists of "executing" the [automated process 
represented by the] Plan, with the parameters which were specified on the 
Request. If we were sticking with the terminology exactly as it is on the 
diagram, your suggestion would be right. However, for the sake of fewer 
words, I think changing it to be "If the execution of the Auto Request 
resulted in a new resource being created" would suffice.

So I propose changing "If the Auto Request resulted in a new resource 
being created" to "If the execution of the Auto Request resulted in a new 
resource being created".


Please +1 or suggest improvements,
Thanks,
Martin
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/20141023/2d719dcb/attachment.html>