[Oslc-pm] open questions from 21-May email

[John Arwe]

It looks like the questions raised 21-May [1] have molded, so I'll start 
by pointing out those that I think are open: 
1, Need to prioritize scenario [3], based on what I see in [2]. 
2. Are any of the already prioritized scenarios intended to include 
"anything -other than-value- (data) of a given metric"?  Where would you 
see the scenarios eliciting a requirement for the "metadata" about a 
metric? 
-- If so, need to render them more explicit. 
3. do/should we have scenarios where a client needs a consistent 
understanding of those properties below, across multiple providers, and is 
able to provide implementation feedback on whatever we specify during 
*this iteration* ? 
--     unit of measurement: percent 
--     source token: percent_cpu_utilization 
--     inverse frequency: 20 

4. Is one timestamp for the entire record sufficient?  is anyone able to 
provide implementation feedback on whatever we specify during *this 
iteration* ? 

5. I showed the "Turtle" as a very simple class instance with concrete 
properties, rather than as a collection of metric objects and a collection 
of values, since that's what most RDF looks like. Is anyone UNwilling to 
live with that?  Do you need to see the equivalent alternative in order to 
have a real opinion? 

6. I have the feeling that [3] is talking about different resource(s) than 
the other scenarios, e.g. about controlling an agent (which might/not be 
the implementation behind a PM SP), but I cannot be sure at this point. 
(more context in [1]).  What is the intent in [3]? 
[1] 
http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-pm_open-services.net/2012-May/000014.html 

[2] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/PmScenariosV2 
[3] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/PmAppMonitAdmin 


Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-pm_open-services.net/attachments/20120613/ccfa3bc1/attachment-0003.html>