Agenda

• Status on minor updates to Rm V2 specification.
• User-defined resource shapes. How can we proceed with a more flexible approach that does not require "errata" when a new link predicate is required?
• Future RM specification content/timelines/version?
  • RmRequirementsOrganizationScenarios
  • Folders

Attendees

SteveSpeicher, SimonWills, DominicTulley, DevangParikh, MikeFiedler? , VishyRamaswamy

On spec update: keep all the version in twiki version format. update the issues register to these revsion-specific pages. (can include a diff page is too). Add some notes to the errata page that discuss potential impact on implemenations. Advertise for another two weeks.

On user-defined link types. We need a core-like protocol - don't want domains doing this differently.

Also, not just link types, but also other aspects of resource shape. We need to agree in core, that these properties are shared.

Do we want these properties to be shared across all providers. How would I arrange for link types to be shared also? We could use a dc:identifier to "share" them across systems. Having a "shared" idea of property might be less acheivable.

For example, being able to share types across (eg) two DOORS modules would be very difficult.

We need a core task force to deal with this topic. Suggest that AM+RM form a workgroup. Simon would like to contribute, may not have lots of time.

How can a resource have multiple types within a domain, also across domain. What does AM do in this case - they may have a better story in this area.

Simon - we also need "navigation". Crudely: can get URL for a resource, GET it; popup OSLC delegated UI. what I need is "what is next one", what are its children, parent etc. What's thedifference between folder and object structure.