[oslc-core] +1 for new property oslc:shortId, OR revised recommendation on use of rdfs:label

[Steve K Speicher]

Just to link to existing issues [1], this was raised by Arthur Ryman back 
in February [2] and thread seemed to have stalled at [3]

[1]: http://open-services.net/wiki/core/OSLC-Core-V2-Issues/ #18
[2]: 
http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/2013-February/001573.html
[3]: 
http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/2013-February/001581.html

Thanks,
Steve Speicher
IBM Rational Software
OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
http://open-services.net

"Oslc-Core" <oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net> wrote on 05/15/2013 
10:45:04 AM:

> From: Nick Crossley/Irvine/IBM at IBMUS
> To: oslc-core at open-services.net
> Date: 05/15/2013 01:10 PM
> Subject: [oslc-core] +1 for new property oslc:shortId, OR revised 
> recommendation on use of rdfs:label
> Sent by: "Oslc-Core" <oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net>
> 
> We have a need for firmer OSLC guidance on this issue.
> 
> In the RDF index for Rational tool data today, you can perform a 
free-text 
> search for a work item number (task number, etc.).  This is because RTC 
puts
> the work item number in both the oslc:shortTitle property and the 
> dcterms:identifier property.  Conversely, RQM does not have any public 
RDF 
> representation of a test case number - and as a result a user cannot 
perform
> a free-text search for a test case by number, nor write a query for it. 
RQM
> uses the dcterms:identifier for an internal identifier, not a human 
readable
> one (in fact, it uses the test case URI as its identifier).
> 
> It would be useful to have a firm recommendation on a property to be 
used 
> for short human-readable identifiers, whether that is oslc:shortId, or a 

> revised recommendation on the use of rdfs:label as per the text quoted 
by 
> Steve in the earlier email:
> 
> [[ 
> Yes, rdfs:label is widely used as "just a label". See: 
> 
> http://www.aifb.kit.edu/images/c/c0/LabelsInTheWebOfData.pdf 
> 
> Usage has evolved from the definition. I agree that the specification 
> ought to be updated. One for the RDF WG group I think. 
> ]] 
> 
> Nick.
> _______________________________________________
> Oslc-Core mailing list
> Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net