[oslc-cm] [Oslc-Automation] Some comments on Actions spec (most from CM perspective)
John Arwe
johnarwe at us.ibm.com
Thu Jan 30 08:40:16 EST 2014
> Comment on section [2]
> I'm not sure why the domain specific types are here. Seems like
> something that would be in CM spec. In fact, we probably wouldn't
> define a oslc:StateTransitionAction but instead just call it
> oslc:Action. Seems like the parent class is extraneous. Clients
> will be looking for oslc_cm:targetState to determine which action to
pick.
> What value is there in having this separate type?
Personally, I've been dubious about oslc:StateTransitionAction for a while
but I've been letting the rest of it settle a bit before calling it out.
"Dubious" simply because all write requests... generic PUT, PATCH, POST,
etc but also all actions which a purist might argue act like POSTs (in
terms of their effect) with some hypermedia decoration for client
discovery... are/might be state transition requests. It's so general that
I am and have been unclear what it adds beyond oslc:Action; it is entirely
possible that such a difference exists and simply has not been articulated
such that I can grasp it, but that's my current state.
Turning it around: if I have some action Foo that I want to expose, I
would hope that the type definition would tell me whether or not I should
be using oslc:StateTransitionAction amongst the types. If, in effect, all
actions are of types oslc:StateTransitionAction and oslc:Action, that's
evidence that they're redundant. If we find a scenario where clients
cannot run the scenario without oslc:StateTransitionAction (which is
different than saying it Can be used), that would be evidence that it's
really needed and might lead to a description that distinguishes it from
:Action.
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-cm_open-services.net/attachments/20140130/07b14ed7/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the Oslc-Cm
mailing list