[oslc-core] "One last" change to OSLC Core representations

[Dave]

Another point to make is that the change I'm proposing is for the OSLC
Core spec. OSLC domain specifications are free to tighten this
requirement and say MUST provide RDF/XML or MUST provide JSON or
whatever is required for the domain's scenarios.

For example, the OSLC-CM v2 spec, which is based on Core, tightens the
requirement to a MUST for RDF/XML and JSON:

   http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2?sortcol=table;table=up#Resource_Formats


Thanks,
- Dave



On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Andrew J Berner <ajberner at us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Dave wrote:
>
>
> Having a "firm requirement for at least one representation" does help
> clients, but we are not there today in our implementations. Today,
> OSLC implementations have and will continue to have for some time
> limitations in their abilities to provide and accept RDF/XML. Changing
> to SHOULD acknowledges fact and still points the way forward.
>
> The term SHOULD is actually a pretty strong requirement, here's what it
> means:
>
> SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
>   may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
>   particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
>   carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
>
>
> Dave--for the implmentations that don't provide/accecpt RDF/XML, what's the
> "valid reason in particular circumstances to ignore" the requirement other
> than "they don't".  "Should" shouldn't mean "you have to do it, unless you
> don't do it, in which case you don't have to."
>
> I second Samit's concern that unless there is a representation used by all
> providers, a client writing code would then have to write separate code for
> each provider, which they could do without OSLC by using the native api of
> the provider.
>
> I used to teach a mathematics class for elementary school teachers that was
> required for graduation.  When a second semester senior failed the course
> (for no good reason other than not studying), I was asked to waive the
> requirement, because otherwise he couldn't graduate.  I didn't, by the way.
>
>
> Andy Berner
> Lead Architect, ISV Technical Enablement and Strategy
> IBM Rational Business Development
> 972 561-6599
> ajberner at us.ibm.com
>
> Ready for IBM Rational software partner program -
> http://www.ibm.com/isv/rational/readyfor.html
>
>