[oslc-core] Finalizing link guidance (was: Re: REMINDER: OSLC Core WG meeting tomorrow 10am US/ET)

Arthur Ryman ryman at ca.ibm.com
Fri Sep 17 14:24:38 EDT 2010 

Samit/Steve,

We don't need the examples to be spec-compliant - just that they apply to 
the domain. We can change the namespace to something like 
http://open-services.example.com/....

Regards, 
___________________________________________________________________________ 

Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE

Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management
IBM Software, Rational
Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063





From:
Samit Mehta <samit.mehta at us.ibm.com>
To:
oslc-core <oslc-core at open-services.net>
Date:
09/17/2010 01:31 PM
Subject:
Re: [oslc-core] Finalizing link guidance (was: Re: REMINDER: OSLC Core WG 
meeting tomorrow 10am US/ET)
Sent by:
oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net



I share Steve's concern.  I can see folks copy the samples and use it as 
initial test data.  The samples are also an easy way to quickly understand 

the data model being proposed by the text in the spec.

Why not link to domain-specific examples from the Core Spec to the various 

Domain Spec?  This way they would match a real domain spec and would be 
maintained to be "correct".  It'll even help maintain that two-way link 
between the Core Spec and the Domain Spec to help implementers to quickly 
navigate to the various Domain Spec examples that are relevant to them.

____________________________________________
Samit Mehta
mailto:samit.mehta at us.ibm.com
IBM Rational Software - Business Development

oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net wrote on 09/17/2010 12:13:44 PM:

> From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> To: Dave <snoopdave at gmail.com>
> Cc: oslc-core <oslc-core at open-services.net>
> Date: 09/17/2010 12:15 PM
> Subject: [oslc-core] Finalizing link guidance (was: Re: REMINDER: 
> OSLC Core WG meeting tomorrow 10am US/ET)
> Sent by: oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> 
> Using ALM/PLM domain examples is good, as long as they match the spec. I 


> think we could run into some situations where people mistake the 
examples 
> in the guidance as "the spec" for a particular domain.  We actually ran 
> into this where some implementers thought that various options in the 
> guidance were acceptable since it was labeled "guidance".  I'm not sure 
we 
> can avoid that completely but just pointing out the advantages and 
> disadvantages of these approaches.
> 
> Personally, I like domain-specific examples as it proves that it solves 
> our problems as long as they are clearly marked as non-spec. (as we are 
> not trying to handle magazine subscriptions even though the concepts 
> apply).
> 
> Thanks,
> Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645
> 
> 
> > From: Dave <snoopdave at gmail.com>
> > To: Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com>
> > Cc: oslc-core <oslc-core at open-services.net>, 
> oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> > Date: 09/17/2010 01:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] REMINDER: OSLC Core WG meeting tomorrow 10am 
> US/ET
> > Sent by: oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> > 
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com> 
wrote:
> > > Thx for improving the example. But now I find myself asking another
> > > question. Why are we using magazine subscriptions?
> > 
> > Because, at the time we came up with the examples, we did not have
> > real domain examples yet.
> > 
> > 
> > > This example looks technically correct, but it looks very contrived. 


> If I
> > > was designing a data model that involved magazine subscriptions, I 
> would
> > > certainly make a Subscription a first-class resource, and I would 
> define
> > > all the usual properties on it. In this example, somehow we have 
> elevated
> > > the subscribesTo property to a higher importance than the 
subscription
> > > itself, and we have in effect turned the reified Statement into a
> > > substitute for a Subscription resource. In practice, I would use a
> > > hasSubscription property to relate the Customer to a Subscription.
> > 
> > We don't really provide guidance on how you decide whether to model a
> > relationship as an intermediate resource or as a link with property
> > values. Perhaps you must do this on a case-by-case basis but what is
> > the thought process? I assume it is based on use cases and attempting
> > to understand the queries needed to support those use cases.
> > 
> > 
> > > I think an example should be more than technically correct. It 
should 
> also
> > > show how a technique is motivated in practice. I have to believe 
that
> > > there is a more compelling example for the introduction of link
> > > properties. We need a real-world, OSLC domain example where it 
becomes
> > > natural to add properties to the link. If we can't find a convincing
> > > example, perhaps this link guidance is not needed.
> > 
> > I believe we have some real examples now and perhaps we should
> > consider adding them to later editions of this guidance.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Dave
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > 
> 
___________________________________________________________________________
> > >
> > > Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE
> > >
> > > Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management
> > > IBM Software, Rational
> > > Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From:
> > > Dave <snoopdave at gmail.com>
> > > To:
> > > oslc-core <oslc-core at open-services.net>
> > > Date:
> > > 09/16/2010 12:58 PM
> > > Subject:
> > > Re: [oslc-core] REMINDER: OSLC Core WG meeting tomorrow 10am US/ET
> > > Sent by:
> > > oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks, Jim. That looks much better. I just made the fixes you 
> suggested
> > > in the link guidance.
> > >
> > > re: formatting dates, I think we should handle that in the 
> Representation
> > > Guidance, which perhaps we need to formally finalize as well.
> > >
> > > - Dave
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 2:03 PM, James Conallen 
<jconallen at us.ibm.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > Some quick comments. I think Example #2 should be simplified with:
> > > <rdf:RDF
> > > xmlns:terms="http://example.com/terms/"
> > > xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
> > >
> > > <terms:Customer rdf:about="http://example.com/customers/4321">
> > > <terms:subscribesTo rdf:resource="
> > > http://example.com/magazines/Field_and_Stream" />
> > > </terms:Customer>
> > >
> > > <terms:Customer rdf:about="http://example.com/customers/4321">
> > > <terms:subscribesTo rdf:resource="
> http://example.com/magazines/Cat_Fancy"
> > > />
> > > </terms:Customer>
> > >
> > > <rdf:Statement rdf:about="">
> > > <terms:expirationDate>2010-06-03</terms:expirationDate>
> > > <terms:annualPriceUSD>23.95</terms:annualPriceUSD>
> > > <rdf:subject rdf:resource="http://example.com/customers/4321"/>
> > > <terms:delivery rdf:resource="http://example.com/terms/online" />
> > > <rdf:subject rdf:resource="http://example.com/customers/4321"/>
> > > <rdf:object rdf:resource="
> http://example.com/magazines/Field_and_Stream"/>
> > > <rdf:predicate rdf:resource="http://example.com/terms/subscribesTo" 
/>
> > > </rdf:Statement>
> > >
> > > <rdf:Statement rdf:about="">
> > > <terms:expirationDate>2010-01-22</terms:expirationDate>
> > > <terms:annualPriceUSD>15.95</terms:annualPriceUSD>
> > > <terms:delivery rdf:resource="http://example.com/terms/mail" />
> > > <rdf:subject rdf:resource="http://example.com/customers/4321"/>
> > > <rdf:object rdf:resource="http://example.com/magazines/Cat_Fancy"/>
> > > <rdf:predicate rdf:resource="http://example.com/terms/subscribesTo" 
/>
> > > </rdf:Statement>
> > >
> > > </rdf:RDF>
> > >
> > > Note I corrected the small typo (copy-paste error) with the actual 
> values
> > > for the expiration date and annual price for the Cat Fancy link. 
Also 
> to
> > > be consistent with the JSON version I corrected the delivery value.
> > >
> > > I think you'll also want to correct in Example #3 the delivery 
method 
> for
> > > the cat fancy link to mail (to be consistent with JSON 
> representation).
> > >
> > > Finally looking at this example, especially with the JSON format, 
have 
> we
> > > given any consideration to formatting dates. For example is the 
first 
> date
> > > June 3rd, or March 6th? In RDF formats we can specify the datetime 
> format
> > > explicitly (i.e. ^^xsd:dateTime ). Not sure about JSON.
> > >
> > > <jim/>
> > >
> > > jim conallen
> > > CAM Lead Architect
> > > jconallen at us.ibm.com
> > > Rational Software, IBM Software Group
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Dave ---09/15/2010 01:48:38 PM---Minutes have been posted here:
> > > http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreMeetings20100915
> > >
> > > From: Dave <snoopdave at gmail.com>
> > > To: oslc-core <oslc-core at open-services.net>
> > > Date: 09/15/2010 01:48 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] REMINDER: OSLC Core WG meeting tomorrow 
10am
> > > US/ET
> > > Sent by: oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Minutes have been posted here:
> > >  http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreMeetings20100915
> > >
> > > As always, feedback is most welcome.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Dave <snoopdave at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> We will have a Core WG meeting tomorrow Wednesday September 15 at 
> 10AM
> > >> US/ET. Here's the info:
> > >>
> > >> Agenda:
> > >>  http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreMeetings20100915
> > >>
> > >> If you have additional agenda items, please speak up.
> > >>
> > >> Telecon:
> > >>  * Participant passcode: 558663
> > >>  * Toll free: 1-866-423-8350
> > >>  * Toll: 1-719-387-8273
> > >>
> > >> Online meeting:
> > >>  * For people outside IBM
> > >>    https://www.lotuslive.com/join?schedid=4446009
> > >>  * For IBM employees
> > >>    https://wedc.lotus.com/meeting/join/?schedid=4446009
> > >
> > >>    (IBM intranet authentication required)
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Dave
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Oslc-Core mailing list
> > > Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> > > 
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Oslc-Core mailing list
> > > Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> > > 
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Oslc-Core mailing list
> > Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> > http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Oslc-Core mailing list
> Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net


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

More information about the Oslc-Core mailing list