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

[Scott Bosworth]

 I like Jim's suggestions and think your edit is a nice incremental
improvement - seems to me that the MAY language is more indicative of what
clients should expect than the initially suggested SHOULD language....Scott



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



From:	Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
To:	Jim des Rivieres <Jim_des_Rivieres at ca.ibm.com>
Cc:	oslc-cm at open-services.net, oslc-core at open-services.net
Date:	09/28/2010 08:59 AM
Subject:	Re: [oslc-cm] [oslc-core] Proposed language / modifications
            to	"Range" definition
Sent by:	oslc-cm-bounces at open-services.net



Hi Jim,

You have good points, I may write it slightly different.  By indicating it
as "MAY" it implies that clients should be prepared to handle any kind of
resource.

Description: The target resource is a related change request. The
target resource MAY be another oslc_cm:ChangeRequest resource.

Is this better?

Thanks,
Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645


Jim des Rivieres <Jim_des_Rivieres at ca.ibm.com> wrote on 09/24/2010
02:36:22 PM:

> From: Jim des Rivieres <Jim_des_Rivieres at ca.ibm.com>
> To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> Cc: oslc-cm at open-services.net, oslc-core at open-services.net
> Date: 09/24/2010 02:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposed language / modifications to "Range"
definition
>
> > "Description: This relationship is loosely coupled and has no
> > specific meaning. The value of this property MAY refer to another
> > oslc_cm:ChangeRequest resource."
>
> This wording is ambiguous. It can be read as denying that the
relationship
> itself has any meaning, instead of the target resource being
unconstrained
> to any particular type.
>
> Also, the name of the property strongly suggests that there is some
> expectation of the type of the target resource.  To capture this
> expectation while making it clear to consumers that they cannot count on

> it, you could say something like:
>
> Description: The target resource is a related change request. While the
> target resource SHOULD be another
> oslc_cm:ChangeRequest resource, the target resource MAY be any kind of
> resource.
>
> Regards,
> Jim des Rivieres | IBM Rational Software | (613) 356-5015
>
>
>
> From:
> Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com>
> To:
> oslc-core at open-services.net
> Cc:
> oslc-cm at open-services.net
> Date:
> 09/24/2010 01:59 PM
> Subject:
> [oslc-core] Proposed language / modifications to "Range" definition
> Sent by:
> oslc-core-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-Core mailing list
> Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
>
>
>


_______________________________________________
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/20100928/f341899a/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/attachments/20100928/f341899a/attachment.gif>