[oslc-core] [oslc-cm] Proposed language / modifications to "Range" definition

[Scott Bosworth]

+1 on the new language Steve.

I assume this would generally apply to most of our link type properties,
including the relationship properties listed in domain tables as well as
things like dcterms:contributor which can be the url of any resource
(though may be a foaf;person). It would not apply to cases where we are
requiring a specific type of resource at the url endpoint (in which case,
anything else would be deemed to be incorrect  -- e.g. oslc:serviceProvider
property must refer to an oslc service provider document)...Scott


Scott Bosworth | IBM Rational CTO Team | bosworth at us.ibm.com | 919.486.2197
(w) | 919.244.3387(m) | 919.254.5271(f)

oslc-cm-bounces at open-services.net wrote on 09/24/2010 01:58:50 PM:

> From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> To: oslc-core at open-services.net
> Cc: oslc-cm at open-services.net
> Date: 09/24/2010 01:59 PM
> Subject: [oslc-cm] Proposed language / modifications to "Range"
definition
> Sent by: oslc-cm-bounces at open-services.net
>
> Last core meeting I took an action to propose some changes to domain
> specifications on how "Range" should be used for relationship properties
> that were not "closed".  Where not "closed" implies that  other kinds of
> resources could potentially live at the other end of the URI reference.
> The need was to make sure that consumers knew that the intent of the
> relationship was to loosely coupled and open, therefore encouraging
> clients to be flexible in handling the de-refencing of these relationship

> URIs.
>
> Here is a sample of the change for the CM spec [1] and the
> relatedChangeRequest relationship property:
>
> New proposed changes::
>         Range: any
>         Description: This relationship is loosely coupled and has no
> specific meaning. The value of this property MAY refer to another
> oslc_cm:ChangeRequest resource.
>
> Original:
>         Range: oslc_cm:ChangeRequest
>         Description: This relationship is loosely coupled and has no
> specific meaning.
>
> Note: I made the change in the spec [1] for only the one property
>
> Looking for feedback on this proposed change.
>
> [1] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2
>
> Thanks,
> Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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-core_open-services.net/attachments/20100924/bed271bc/attachment-0003.html>