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
>
ArchMgmtMeetings
>
ArchMgmtMeetings20120524
(24 May 2012,
JimConallen
)
(raw view)
Date: *24 May 2012* <br />Time: 7:00 AM Pacific, 10:00 AM Eastern, 3:00 PM UK, 4:00 PM Frankfurt, 5:00 PM Haifa, 8:30 PM Bangalore<br />Call In Number: (emailed)<br />Participation request: contact JimConallen ---++ Agenda 1 Updates on Core Activities 1 [[http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/2012-May/001317.html][Value Type]] 1 PATCH support 1 [[http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/2012-March/001257.html][Requests for unknown or unsupported properties]] 1 Discuss migration of vocabularies from propriertery to OSLC. 1 [[AmDiagramResource][Diagram]] resource type. Should we define one? 1 Continue discussion on [[AmPredicateUriInImpactAnalysis][impact analysis scenarios]] ---++ Attendance Regrets: Eldad Palachi, Eran Gery, John Crouchley, Jean-Louis Marechaux Atendees: Steve Speicher, Jim Conallen ---++ Minutes We discussed the general issue of migrating vocabularies. The basic situation happens when implementers of resources define terms themselves that they need in order for their apps to work. But sometime later some of these terms get defined by a more authoratitive body (like the OSLC). Most of the properties remain the same, but a different namespace or authority is used. Everyone wants to start using these newer, and presumably better defined and more reusable terms. What guidance can we provide to clients and providers alike to deal with this situation. 1. We can have service providers provide both forms of properties (old namespace and new). Clients only look at what they expect to see. But doing PUTs might get confusing, if there is a contradiciton. 2. Have clients specify exactly what version to look for (i.e. OSLC-Core-Version: 2.0). 3. Have servers be responsible for transforming old style resources to new styled ones. 4. ... We also discussed the need to identify dependency directions in property definitions. Since the meeting was so lightly attended, we decided that Jim would detail these discussions and send it out to the AM and Core workgroups list.
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r2
<
r1
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
Ra
w
edit
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r2 - 24 May 2012 - 18:02:01 -
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