[oslc-cm] Proposed clarifying changes for Query Request XML format used

[Samuel Padgett]

+1 on this proposal. The new language makes things clearer.

- Thanks, Sam




From:
Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
To:
oslc-cm at open-services.net
Date:
10/14/2010 11:41 AM
Subject:
Re: [oslc-cm] Proposed clarifying changes for Query Request XML format 
used
Sent by:
oslc-cm-bounces at open-services.net



I got some feedback after a discussion with someone that this was still a 
bit confusing.  Perhaps it would be best to be extremely explicit.  So 
here's a new proposal:

For HTTP GET response formats for Query requests,

CM Providers MUST provide RDF/XML, XML, Atom Syndication Format XML and 
JSON representations.

When CM Consumers request:
    * application/rdf+xml CM Providers MUST respond with RDF/XML 
representation without restrictions.
    * application/json CM Providers MUST respond with JSON representation 
as defined in the OSLC Core Representations Guidance.
    * application/xml CM Provider MUST respond with OSLC-defined 
abbreviated XML representation as defined in the OSLC Core Representations 

Guidance. 
    * application/atom+xml CM Provider MUST respond with Atom Syndication 
Format XML representation as defined in the OSLC Core Representations 
Guidance.
       * The Atom Syndication Format XML representation SHOULD use RDF/XML 

for the atom:content entries representing the resource representations.

    See Query Capabilities for additional information when Resource Shapes 

affect representation 

-----------------

I still need to work on a better name for " OSLC-defined abbreviated XML 
representation", I'll work with Core WG on this.

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


Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM wrote on 10/13/2010 03:54:31 PM:

> From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM
> To: oslc-cm at open-services.net
> Date: 10/13/2010 03:54 PM
> Subject: Proposed clarifying changes for Query Request XML format used
> 
> Per my action from today's WG meeting [1] to address an ambiguity in 
using 
> application/xml and query response representation.  I have included the 
> changes inline for comment and here [2] for reference 
> 
> For HTTP GET response formats for Query requests,
> 
>     * CM Providers MUST provide RDF/XML, XML, Atom Syndication Format 
XML and 
> JSON representations.
>     * The XML, Atom Syndication Format XML and JSON representations 
SHOULD 
> follow the guidelines outlined in the OSLC Core Representations 
Guidance.
>     * The XML representation MUST be identified by using the 
application/xml 
> content type. This representation may not be the same as the Atom 
Syndication 
> Format XML representation, see OSLC Core Representations Guidance
>     * The Atom Syndication Format XML representation SHOULD use RDF/XML 
for 
> the atom:content entries representing the resource representations.
>     * See Query Capabilities for additional information when Resource 
Shapes 
> affect representation 
> 
> [1] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmMeetings10132010
> [2] 
http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2#Resource_Formats
> 
> Thanks,
> Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645


_______________________________________________
Oslc-Cm mailing list
Oslc-Cm at open-services.net
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-cm_open-services.net


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-cm_open-services.net/attachments/20101022/8c469cec/attachment-0003.html>