[oslc-core] Couple of new Core issues

[Dave]

A number of new issues have appeared on the Core issues page and are
worthy of discussion here on the list and possibly in our workgroup
meeting this week.

I've reproduced the issues below so you can comment if you see fit. As
you can see from the first issue, some folks have had a change of
heart about paging of arbitrary resources causing me to REOPEN the
resource paging issue. There are also a couple of good wording /
nomenclature changes that Martin suggested.

   1 %RED%REOPENED%ENDCOLOR% Remove Resource Paging for resources
other than query because it has not been implement, some say it is too
ambitious and it places too much of a burden on existing OSLC specs
that wish to migrate to the core this year (DaveJohnson 04/14/2010)
      * *Response*: the existing paging section has been moved into
the Query Capabilties section and paging is now allowed only for Query
Resources (DaveJohnson 04/16/2010)
      * *Reopened*: without Resource Paging for arbitrary resources we
provide no way to deal with resources that have huge numbers of values
for a multi-valued property (e.g. a Directory resource will millions
of links to Files). Paging was always optional for providers, but if
we require that clients specifically request paging (via URL parameter
oslc.paging=true), then we remove the burden clients as well. Clients
that don't want or know about paging will never see it and only those
that want it will get it. Move paging out of query and back in to the
OSLC Defined Resources section.

   1 %RED%OPEN%ENDCOLOR% When defining a resource, do not use term
"Type URI" because we are not defining a type, use URI instead. We
should also point out that we are defining an RDF Class here
(MartinNally via DaveJohnson 05/24/2010)

   1 %RED%OPEN%ENDCOLOR% When defining a property, do not use term
"Type URI" because we are not defining a type, use URI instead. We
should also point out that we are defining an RDF Predicate here
(MartinNally via DaveJohnson 05/24/2010)

   1 %RED%OPEN%ENDCOLOR% In the ServiceProvider resource, do not use
term Namespace Definition because we not defining namespaces, we are
defining prefixes. Use classname "PrefixDefinition" with properties
"prefix" and "prefixBase" (MartinNally via DaveJohnson 05/24/2010)

   1 %RED%OPEN%ENDCOLOR% Small improvement, in the representation
examples, can we use small single-digit numbers in our URLs instead of
those silly hex strings? (DaveJohnson 05/21/2010)


As always, feedback is welcome.

Thanks,
Dave