[Oslc-pm] Document guidance involving resources from crtv vocabulary/Reconciliation workgroup

[Tuan Dang]

Hi John,

I'd like this guidance on how to use rdfs:Container and rdf:type with the 
crtv URIs to be documented in a workgroup.

There is no current need for reconciling rdfs:Containers so nothing is 
being added to the Reconcilation spec. The URIs are added to the 
vocabulary only.
Since the use case is for returning metrics for resource pools, It seems 
logical that this guidance be added to the PerfMon spec or to a PerfMon 
supporting document.

Thanks ! T

Tuan Dang
Tivoli OSLC governance, OSLC Reconciliation workgroup lead, Tivoli Common 
Data Model
Internet: tdang at us.ibm.com
phone: (919) 224-1242 T/L 687-1242




From:   John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM at IBMUS
To:     oslc-pm at open-services.net, 
Date:   02/19/2013 06:17 PM
Subject:        Re: [Oslc-pm] Document guidance involving resources from 
crtv vocabulary/Reconciliation workgroup
Sent by:        "Oslc-Pm" <oslc-pm-bounces at open-services.net>



> handle this 
Unclear what you would consider handling it. 
We have a similar situation (normative dependency on EMS vocabulary not 
used in any finalized spec).  We're in the process of working out the 
process with Core on EMS, meeting later this week.  Odds are we should use 
a "very similar" process here.  There are differences (the dependency on 
crtv is soft not hard as it was with EMS). 
Is Reconciliation defining a resource shape for rdfs:Container (or does it 
have a resource definition table for same, which is equivalent) where 
these would be naturally listed as "sub-types"?  Or is there no need for 
reconciling rdfs:Container 's and so those terms are vocabulary non grata? 

Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages 
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario 




From:        Tuan Dang/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS 
To:        oslc-pm at open-services.net, 
Date:        02/19/2013 03:29 PM 
Subject:        [Oslc-pm] Document guidance involving resources from crtv 
vocabulary/Reconciliation workgroup 
Sent by:        "Oslc-Pm" <oslc-pm-bounces at open-services.net> 



Hi all, 

Janet Andersen and I have been discussing how to represent metrics for 
resource pools ( e.g. pools of database connections ). 
We ended up using the following : 

Resource pool categories 
=================== 

OSLC services providers can represent pools of shared resources (e.g. a 
set of shared database connections) using the rdfs:Container resource 
definition. To help in categorizing these pools, the following RDFS 
classes are defined 
URI          Description 
http://open-services.net/ns/crtv#ThreadPool                     a set of 
shared threads 
http://open-services.net/ns/crtv#DatabasePool                     a set of 
shared database connections 
http://open-services.net/ns/crtv#J2CConnectorPool         a set of shared 
J2C connections 

My question is where do we put this guidance ? We're using resources from 
http://open-services.net/ns/crtv#  which should mean that we document 
in the Reconciliation workgroup. But, the applicable scenario is from Perf 
Mon and the issue does not fall in the Reconciliation wg scope. 

I'm proposing that we handle this either in the Perf Mon spec or in a Perf 
Mon supporting document. 

Thanks ! T

Tuan Dang
Tivoli OSLC governance, OSLC Reconciliation workgroup lead, Tivoli Common 
Data Model
Internet: tdang at us.ibm.com
phone: (919) 224-1242 T/L 687-1242
_______________________________________________
Oslc-Pm mailing list
Oslc-Pm at open-services.net
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-pm_open-services.net
_______________________________________________
Oslc-Pm mailing list
Oslc-Pm at open-services.net
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-pm_open-services.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-pm_open-services.net/attachments/20130220/0ac2ab1c/attachment-0003.html>