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
>
OslcCore
>
OslcCoreMeetings
>
OslcCoreMeetings03242010
(23 Aug 2011,
SteveSpeicher
)
(raw view)
---+ OSLC Core Meeting March 24, 2010 ---++ Meeting logistics See the [[OslcCoreMeetings]] for telecon number, passcode and online meeting info. ---++ Agenda * Status * Status of Core Spec review & responses [[OslcCoreV2Issues]] * Status of Query Syntax work * Status of Service Resources work * Status of Delegated UI work * End game plan * Plan is to have four two-hour sessions next week: * Monday March 29 - 10AM to 12 noon US/ET * Monday March 29 - 1:30PM to 3:30PM US/ET * Tuesday March 30 - 10AM to 12 noon US/ET * Tuesday March 30 - 1:30PM to 3:30PM US/ET * Issue: how should we schedule this time? * Discuss remaining open issues * Issue: Error response * Issue: How paging should work * Issue: Can we have one Query Resource "shape"? * Issue: oslc.properties=* * Issue: Need for "Member Property" boolean? * Issue: Need for OAuth URL discoverability ---++ Meeting Minutes Possible Attendees * DaveJohnson * NickCrossley * JimConallen * RobertElves * PaulMcMahan * TackTong * ScottBosworth ScottBosworth: how should we interpet the DEFERRED status on the Issues page? We need to indicate whether we are deferring to solve soon or just tabling for some later time; might want to consider leaving "solve soon" ones OPEN. DaveJohnson: I agree that we should indicate what DEFERRED means each time that we use it. AI: DaveJohnson to devise schedule for our eight-hours of review next week. PaulMcMahan: we need !I18N for Delegated UI AI: DaveJohnson to address !I18N concerns around Resource Shapes. Two approaches suggested are to 1) use User Agent to determine which language to use in Resource Shape titles, descriptions, etc. or 2) have each Resource Shape include all localizations. AI: DaveJohnson to respond to Tack's suggestions on paging and look at prior-art in !AtomPub. Consider: way for clients to discover what assumptions they can make about paging, use of 410 "expired" etc.
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 - 23 Aug 2011 - 13:36:34 -
SteveSpeicher
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