index / Automation Meetings / This page

Time: 11:00AM Eastern US (Currently 4pm UTC)

Agenda

Chair: Martin

• Main agenda items:
  • Review 16 Jan minutes
  • Specification issues
    • Automation Specification Version 2.0 Issues - Any new?
    • Automation Specification Version 2.1 Issues - Any new?
  • Automation 2.1
    • “Action resources” - what do we need to do to get this finished?
  • If time is available: “Availability” update
    • http://open-services.net/wiki/automation/Availability-Scenarios/
    • Any changes to existing scenario pages?
  • AOB
    • Implementation updates
      • Open forum for implementers to provide updates
      • Summarize any new implementation reports
  • Workgroup business
    • Next meeting 30th Jan
• Items for later phases/meetings:
  • Action resources 2.0 - Best practice for inline/referenced resources (or a combination)?
  • Vocab document 2.1 update - New rdf:type URI for template creation dialogs

Actions from previous meetings

• Umberto - Update template dialog draft 2.1 spec to reflect that standard operation is to treat the template as text (or bytes). If the consumer changes anything they have to know what they are doing. (Also add a comment that we expect the template to be POSTed to a creation factory - this currently isn’t mentioned). See 9 Jan minutes.
• Martin - Draft spec for linking template dialogs to creation factories (and other bindings). See 9 Jan minutes.

Minutes

Attending: Martin, Jurgen, John

• Actions, getting it finished:
  • Scenarios. Clearly document?
  • Examples and explanation of how to achieve each of those scenarios.
  • Specific spec things:
    • Automation teardown, inc execute-later action
    • Update the spec from ‘template’ discussions
  • Spec clean-up/editorial issues
  • Implementations
  • Core feedback
  • CM profile & use - SS
  • issues
    • 1. JA suggests “strongly recommended”. “Otherwise, to be reassured of interop you would need something beyond the spec”
    • 1. Types will hopefully come out of writing examples.
    • 1. Is clean-up
    • 1. Hopefully resolved by ‘templates’ discussion changes
    • 1. Auto scenario
    • 1. Editorial/review - close?
• Interaction pattern slicing
  • “identification” suggests “URI”.
  • “recognition” or “definition” rule
  • otherwise leave it as separate patterns for now.
• Template usage
  • Does anyone need local resources that are there to be used as templates?
    • No scenarios we’re aware of
    • Need to check with Umberto
  • ContentAsRDF?
    • content:Content
    • oslc predicate

    <request>
        a http:Request;
        http:body [
            a oslc:ContentFromRepresentation, content:Content;
            rdf:value </resourceForTemplate>;
        ]
    .

“We assign meaning X to this combination. The provider MUST be able to operate under this interpretation. The consumer MAY choose to use it. (But we can only help the consumer when they choose to use that interpretation.) IF the consumer uses the interpretation assigned by the spec, then the provider MUST provide the behaviour documented by the spec.”

• Availability next week. Changes to existing scenarios made from discussion last week.
• JA to start write-up of template usage, and http body from representation, and issue-8, and “identification” -> “recognition”. (No other core actions work comes to mind).
• MP to work on Auto Actions spec/changes