[oslc-core] today's meeting - authoring extensions vs shapes
Arthur Ryman
ryman at ca.ibm.com
Wed Nov 13 15:58:45 EST 2013
John,
I'd appreciate a demo so I can understand better what you are doing. After
that, I'll be in a better position to say if any of these properties
should be in the shape resource.
Regards,
___________________________________________________________________________
Arthur Ryman
DE, Chief Architect, Reporting &
Portfolio and Strategy Management
IBM Software, Rational
Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) | +1-416-939-5063 (mobile)
From: John Arwe <johnarwe at us.ibm.com>
To: oslc-core at open-services.net,
Date: 11/12/2013 05:39 PM
Subject: Re: [oslc-core] today's meeting - authoring extensions vs
shapes
Sent by: "Oslc-Core" <oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net>
Adding them to shapes would not be my first choice, they're fairly
authoring-specific ... useful for converting to wiki format.
I have 3 now:
- section title (common properties, domain blah extensions) for within
wiki table, since we like to partition common from domain adds
- row order within the wiki table/section (can probably use seq for this
in the end)
- For resource ref rows: "It is likely that the target of the link is an
XYZ, but this is not guaranteed to be the case." Give it the XYZ value,
and the code will add the boilerplate containing it to the desc.
If you're dead convinced any of that belongs in shapes-proper I'm unlikely
to object. The 3rd one is closest to being a yes there, but it still only
occurs in the wiki/spec tables I think. Concrete implementations I'm
guessing would change the Range=Any to be Range=XYZ if that's what they
find useful as the link target, but if experience shows otherwise who am I
to argue.
Best Regards, John
Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
From: Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com>
To: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM at IBMUS,
Cc: oslc-core at open-services.net, "Oslc-Core"
<oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net>
Date: 11/06/2013 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: [oslc-core] today's meeting
John,
Are the extension properties candidates for the Shapes spec?
Regards,
___________________________________________________________________________
Arthur Ryman
DE, Chief Architect, Reporting &
Portfolio and Strategy Management
IBM Software, Rational
Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) | +1-416-939-5063 (mobile)
From: John Arwe <johnarwe at us.ibm.com>
To: oslc-core at open-services.net,
Date: 11/06/2013 10:19 AM
Subject: [oslc-core] today's meeting
Sent by: "Oslc-Core" <oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net>
FYI/regrets-like: I will have to swap over to an executive call for about
10 minutes, probably nearer the start but time is not exact (someone will
be poking me on chat when it's time).
agenda += (wrt Actions) the proposal draft does include a namespace; would
be useful to see if Core is OK with that choice or wants a different one.
The "images not showing" problem may be a website issue, I've asked the
webmaster to look at something suspect I found this morning.
agenda += (new topic, potentially related to vocabulary guidance work)
I've been working on some tools to help with spec authoring - specifically
the resource definition tables. In the course of that, I've come across
the need for some extension properties (2, so far). It would be
convenient to have a properly allocated namespace for those, even if it's
not mature enough to work deeply in public just yet (I want to have
prototype working first, and it's not there yet).
Best Regards, John
Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
_______________________________________________
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