[oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview label

[Steve K Speicher]

Hi Ian,

To be very clear, UIPreview is NOT RDF.  It is XML.

This has always been the case, the only clarity that we have made is that 
the type is really just String and were made clear the escaping needed 
(which was correct in the example but not clear in the description).  This 
matched what a number of implementations were already doing.  Perhaps we 
can have a separate discussion to understand the impact to you or ways we 
can handle it.

Core WG has already agreed to change the spec some time ago [1] , I am now 
just putting pen to paper to get the agreed text in the spec.

[1] - http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreV2Issues #25 

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


Ian Green1 <ian.green at uk.ibm.com> wrote on 07/04/2012 12:11:07 PM:

> From: Ian Green1 <ian.green at uk.ibm.com>
> To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS, 
> Cc: oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> Date: 07/04/2012 12:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview 
label
> 
> Hi Steve 
> My assumption was that XHTML in a RDF XMLLiteral would not be 
html-encoded, 
> but rather would be XML.  That's why XMLLiteral is in RDF - to deal with 
the
> common case of XML literals.  DOORS9, for example, does not escape xhtml 
in 
> such literals.  So you will find "The rocket <s>MUST</s> launch" in a 
DOORS9
> UI preview document.  RRC does not have markup in a title. 
> 
> I don't know how all OSLC RM consumers deal with the XMLLiteral. Adding 
> clarification to the spec (that XHTML markup SHOULD NOT be escaped) 
seems 
> appropriate and does not require the spec. to be changed.  Am I missing 
something? 
> 
> best wishes,
>    -ian
> 
> ian.green at uk.ibm.com (Ian Green1/UK/IBM at IBMGB)
> Chief Software Architect, Requirements Definition and Management
> IBM Rational 
> 
> oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net wrote on 29/06/2012 15:19:40:
> 
> > From: Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com> 
> > To: oslc-core at open-services.net, 
> > Date: 29/06/2012 15:33 
> > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview 
label 
> > Sent by: oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net 
> > 
> > Ian Green1 <ian.green at uk.ibm.com> wrote on 06/29/2012 10:11:46 AM:
> > 
> > > From: Ian Green1 <ian.green at uk.ibm.com>
> > > To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS, 
> > > Cc: oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> > > Date: 06/29/2012 10:12 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI 
preview 
> > label
> > > 
> > > Sorry, I've not been tracking this; apologies for late comments. 
> > > 
> > > I understand that the proposal is to reword the current 
specification? 
> > If
> > > so, should there not be some provision for backwards compatibility 
for 
> > > current implementations? 
> > > 
> > It turns out that what was in the spec wasn't clear or very 
compatible, so 
> > we aligned with what implementations reported they were doing late 
last 
> > year as the recommendation forward.
> > 
> > > The DOORS implementation includes XHTML markup in the title of the 
> > > oslc:Compact XML element.  If the spec. were to be changed as is 
> > currently 
> > > being proposed, the DOORS implementation would not be compliant. 
> > > 
> > You can still include XHTML markup in the title, that has not changed. 

> > What is changed is how it is represented, instead of XMLLiteral we are 

> > saying HTML-escaped content.  How does DOORS encode/escape the XHTML 
> > elements?  Does DOORS Compact titles render properly in other tools 
that 
> > consume it if they are doing it differently? 
> > 
> > > It seems to me to be a bad idea.  Could this issue be deferred to 
v3, or 
> > can
> > > a different approach be taken which ensures compatibility? 
> > > 
> > It was decided last year in the WG that things were unclear (and a bit 

> > broken) so we came up the resolution then (which followed what most 
> > implementations are doing, including RRC).  I know Devang was going to 

> > investigate more and report back.
> > 
> > Let me know how DOORS handles, perhaps we need to have a meeting to 
review 
> > and talk through the options.
> > 
> > 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
> > 
> 
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 
3AU