This wiki is locked. Future workgroup activity and specification development must take place at
our new wiki
. For more information, see
this blog post about the new governance model
and
this post about changes to the website
.
TWiki
>
Main Web
>
AmHome
>
AmArchitectureDirection1
(13 Oct 2009,
JimConallen
)
(raw view)
---+ OSLC Architectural Direction for AM Initial Specification When it comes to collaborative integration across domains it is clear that architectural approaches need to be compatible, and ideally the same. Therefore for the initial release ofthe AM specifications the architectural direction will follow the lead blazed by the Change Management team primarily with their [[CmArchitecturalDirection][1.0 Architectural Direction]] document but also with an eye and consideration on the more recent [[CmArchitecturalDirectionV2][2.0 Architectural Direction]] working draft. ---+++ Architectural Decisions for OSLC AM 1.0 1 Services will be discoverable by traversing configuration collections until a service specification document is returned. 1 Provide a miminal set of properties for resources based on Dublin Core 1 Usage of [[http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-modified][dc:modifed]] , [[http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-title][dc:title]], and [[http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-creator][dc:creator]] for support in all resources, assisting in reporting tools, feed readers and other synchronization tools. 1 Default format for a collection of resources is ATOM syndication format (with OSLC AM content format inline vs. reference) 1 Resource links are handled as a multi-valued property on a resource 1 There will be a simple GET-based query syntax, with content format negotiation via Accept headers. 1 Resources will support at least application/xml as request and response format. 1 Presentations for resources can be requested using the HTTP Accept header with values such as text/html or application/xhtml+xml 1 Model Element creation and modification 1 do we require service implementations to permit for all modeling types? Can this be optional for some types? ---++ Comments Enter your comments here. %COMMENT% -- Main.JimConallen - 20 Aug 2009
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r4
<
r3
<
r2
<
r1
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
Ra
w
edit
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r4 - 13 Oct 2009 - 17:59:30 -
JimConallen
Main
Main Web
Create New Topic
Index
Search
Changes
Notifications
RSS Feed
Statistics
Preferences
Webs
Main
Sandbox
TWiki
Български
Cesky
Dansk
Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
日本語
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Svenska
简体中文
簡體中文
Copyright � by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our
Terms of Use
Ideas, requests, problems regarding this site?
Send feedback