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
>
OslcCoreMeetings20100714
(14 Jul 2010,
DaveJohnson
)
(raw view)
---+ OSLC Core Meeting July 14, 2010 ---++ Meeting logistics See the [[OslcCoreMeetings]] for more information, more dial-in numbers and on-line meeting information. * Conference Access * Toll free: 1-866-423-8350 * Toll: 1-719-387-8273 * Participant passcode: 558663 ---++ Agenda Recent changes to OSLC Core spec ([[http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecDRAFT]]) * Change to RDF/XML representation guidelines: <blockquote> An OSLC service MUST provide RDF/XML representations of all OSLC Defined Resources. For each resource, an OSLC service may offer either an abbreviated RDF/XML subset that is XML-tool friendly, a full RDF/XML or both forms according to these rules: * When an OSLC client asks for RDF/XML by using content-negotiation to request content-type application/rdf+xml, then the client MUST accept any valid RDF/XML and the server MAY return either full RDF-XML or Abbreviated RDF/XML as defined below. * When an OSLC client asks for XML by using content-negotiation to request content-type application/xml, then the server MUST return XML and MAY return abbreviated RDF/XML as defined below. * When an OSLC client requests application/xml and the server only provides full RDF/XML then the server SHOULD return an HTTP status of 406 (Not Acceptable). (also added text about configuring Jena for abbreviated RDF/XML and a how to generate full RDF/XML, i.e. see the spec) </blockquote> Finalization plans * Next week on July 21 we: * Declare the OSLC Core spec to be in finalization * Remove the word DRAFT from the spec and URLs * We allow only corrections and clarifications to the spec * We encourage our currently converging specs to finalize * We wait to declare the spec "final" when implementations are compete ---++ Minutes Notes from the meeting... ---+++ Attendees * Mike Loeffler * Robert Elves * Nick Crossley * Paul MacMahan * Jim Conallen * Steve Speicher * Scott Bosworth * ArthurRyman ---+++ Topics discussed Need for common properties, some of which are required across all resources Missing properties in Appendix A common properties Existance of two Common properties lists: appendix A which will be frozen with the Core and a separate Common properties document that is a living registry of common properties Problem: we have two lists of common properties and we only need one, the living one *AI: Dave to move merge common properties into one list* Then discussed changes to Core spec re: =application/rdf:xml= and =application/xml= Opposition to returning error when client requests =application/xml= and server can only return =application/rdf+xml= Arthur raised the issue that the subset is bad idea because 1) RDF/XML is well known enough now and parsing it is not a burden and 2) the subset is not well specified enough to be a real format and thus will lead to brittle implementaitons. *AI: Dave to come up with alternative proposal before next meeting* Did not get to the topic of finalization and considering the RDF/XML discussion we are not ready to finalize.
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r3
<
r2
<
r1
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
Ra
w
edit
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r3 - 14 Jul 2010 - 15:17:46 -
DaveJohnson
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