Meeting20130612

OSLC Core Meeting June 12, 2013

Previous meeting

Meeting logistics

Included in Meetings

Agenda / Minutes

Review Minutes from May 22

OSLC @ OASIS Updates * Core TC to be first to transition * Currently starting to scope, draft charter and recruit participants * Planning to start Core TC in October

TRS 2.0 Spec edits completed * Arthur - need to define ‘sync point’ and normative definition of ‘roll back’, esp. in the usage of: ” The URI of a Change Event MUST be guaranteed unique, even in the wake of a Server roll back where sequence numbers get reused”

OSLC Core V2 Issues - Outstanding issues and proposed updates

• Core-17 Handling of long URIs

  • Review proposed changes
  • HOLD Awaiting response from similar discussion in W3C LDP WG

• Core-19 How to determine if server supports pre-fill

  • Proposal: Use HEAD on creation dialog URL, look for Allow: header and then look for POST verb…if verb is there, then most likely can prefill
  • Agreement from WG on approach, John to double check with implementers

• Call to WG members to close out any issues that appear to be “OPEN”. Think some are complete but paperwork (updating wiki page of issues) hasn’t been completed.

V3 Spec Drafting - OSLCCoreSpecificationsV3

• Comments on Link Guidance
  • Steve’s proposals Where it says: “Whenever possible links should be stored in the graph identified by the subject URI. ” Replace with something like this: “The link (statement) should be stored with the document/graph that asserts the relationship.”

Some alternatives discussed JimC: “The link (statement) may be stored in any graph (only in one graph).” Arthur: consider - sample of who is asserting the relationship and is a higher authority on it, the statement may occur in many places and if a specialist in a RM, they may assert the same relationship made by QM tool…you’d want to trust more or treat differently some of the statements based on the provenance.

• John’s comments

  • Cursory view, to review off-line.

    • Updates PATCH support - looking at named graph syntax to support model

• W3C LDP WG not handling in 1.0, deferring and considering more of a research effort for now.

  • Use cases and requirements for vocabulary definitions going forward and a proposal

Next meeting:

• June 19 - conflict (W3C LDP WG)
  • Propose to reschedule for June 26

Open / future topics:

• EdGentry suggested topic: Pickers: with preferred or restricted link types, limiting what can be selected or linked to resource type. SteveS suggests submitting the scenario + some details to either RM (or other appropriate WG) or Core to seed the discussion.

• NickC suggested topic: need to extend the OSLC pickers (and other areas possibly like query) to allow a [configuration] context to be passed, so the provider can show the versions/variants of the resources in that context, and so the resulting link preserves that context.

Attendees

Attendees: SteveSpeicher (chair), StevePitschke, JohnArwe, ArthurRyman, JimConallen

Regrets:

Possible Attendees: SteveSpeicher (chair), MichaelFiedler, EdGentry, StevePitschke, DevangParikh, PaulMcMahan, JohnArwe, PaulSlauenwhite, NickCrossley, SamPadgett, SheehanAnderson, SuzetteSamoojh, DonCronin, JimConallen, IanGreen, GrayBachelor, NicholasKruk, DavidHoney, ChristopherLazzaro, SofiaYeung, RainerErsch, AndyBerner, CharlesRankin, MikeLoeffler, ArthurRyman, JulianneBielski, RobertElves, TuanDang