[Oslc-pm] Review of PerfMon spec

[John Arwe]

> 6. Why does spec guidance provide prefix suggestions for other 
> domains?  It may be appropriate to suggest a prefix for the perfmon 
> domain, but not others.  It is expected define prefixes that are 
> used throughout the rest of the spec, but not so suggest that othersuse 
them.
> 
> The namespaces section should look more like the other specs and 
> just state: "In addition to the namespace URIs and namespace 
> prefixes defined in the OSLC Core specification, OSLC Performance 
> Monitoring defines the namespace URI of 
http://open-services.net/ns/perfmon#
> with a namespace prefix of pm." 
> 

I don't think it's as simple as dumbing the content down to match the 
norm.  Perf Mon is re-using vocabularies other than Core, which is not the 
current/historical norm but (personal suspicion) may become more common 
over time.  I re-worked that section today; see if the new version draws 
the appropriate lines crisply enough IYO.




http://open-services.net/wiki/performance-monitoring/OSLC-Performance-Monitoring-Specification-Version-2.0/#Namespaces

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/20130110/d417640b/attachment-0003.html>