[oslc-cm] Providing additional types of "change request"-like resources -- ANY MORE FEEDBACK?

[Nils Kronqvist]

+1 

I like making type be more explicit. Are you also envisioning the subclasses then be specialized i.e. additional properties, modification of "requiredness" of properties etc? 

Rgs,

Nils Kronqvist
Senior Software Engineer
Arne Beurlings Torg 9A, 4tr
164 40 Kista
nils.kronqvist at find-out.se
mobil: +46 76 1279272
www.find-out.se

On 24 jan 2013, at 19:31, Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com> wrote:

> Fellow CM'rs,
> 
> We plan to talk about this on the January 31st call, so please either:
> a) Join the call to discussion [1]
> b) Provide feedback (thanks Paul! [2])
> 
> [1] - 
> http://open-services.net/wiki/change-management/Meeting-agendas-and-minutes/
> [2] - 
> http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-cm_open-services.net/2012-November/000431.html
> 
> Thanks,
> Steve Speicher
> IBM Rational Software
> OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
> http://open-services.net
> 
>> From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
>> To: oslc-cm at open-services.net, 
>> Date: 11/29/2012 01:48 PM
>> Subject: [oslc-cm] Providing additional types of "change request"-like 
> resources
>> Sent by: "Oslc-Cm" <oslc-cm-bounces at open-services.net>
>> 
>> Currently, the CM 2.0 defines only 1 rdf:type of resource and we all 
> know 
>> and love that as oslc_cm:ChangeRequest.
>> 
>> There are many other "kinds" of change requests, today we help guide 
> some 
>> scenarios that are looking for these kinds of resources by using 
>> oslc:usage with some known values [1],[2].
>> 
>> Not having these usage identifiers be rdf:types has always been a little 
> 
>> odd, for a number of reasons:
>> - Typical way of querying and inferring the type of resource relied on 
>> non-standard ways
>> - Associating dialogs, factories, queries without these type is a bit 
> off.
>> 
>> We've already proven the need for these usage/type things.  So the names 
> 
>> (ids) and concepts are still valid.
>> 
>> My proposal: 
>>        In 3.0, introduce these as additional subtypes (rdfs:subClassOf 
>> oslc_cm:ChangeRequest) as first class OSLC-CM resource types: Defect, 
>> PlanItem, Task, RequirementsChangeRequest. 
>> 
>> [1] - 
>> 
> http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-cm_open-services.net/2010-June/000172.html
> 
>> [2] - 
>> 
> http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2#Usage_Identifiers
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Steve Speicher
>> IBM Rational Software
>> OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
>> http://open-services.net
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Oslc-Cm mailing list
>> Oslc-Cm at open-services.net
>> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-cm_open-services.net
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130125/700aebc0/attachment-0003.html>