[OASIS Issue Tracker] (OSLCCORE-50) Should we omit the "read-only" values in the discovery resource shapes?

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

     [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OSLCCORE-50?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

James Amsden updated OSLCCORE-50:
---------------------------------

    Proposal: 
We change "true" to "unspecified" for all properties on all discovery resource shapes - leaving the decision up to the implementations.

The TC discussed this and thought it could create some compatibility issues. We decided to include section 5.2 Updating Discovery Information in discover.html to indicate that servers may provide other means of updating their configurations that are reflected in the service provider discovery resources with read-only values. That means clients can't use PUT of service provider discovery resources to reconfigure a server, but servers could provide other means.

  was:We change "true" to "unspecified" for all properties on all discovery resource shapes - leaving the decision up to the implementations.


> Should we omit the "read-only" values in the discovery resource shapes?
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OSLCCORE-50
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OSLCCORE-50
>             Project: OASIS OSLC Lifecycle Integration Core (OSLC Core) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Martin Pain
>            Assignee: James Amsden
>            Priority: Minor
>
> This was the case in v2 (so perhaps we can defer this), but I don't see why we set "read-only" to true for these properties. I would have thought some servers might allow clients to create new ServiceProviders, or modify ones they previously created. e.g. a generic ServiceProviderCatalog server that acts as a registry of other servers. I'd suggest we have read-only as not specified (if that won't be problematic), but this is probably too big a thing to consider at this stage. It's not really causing a problem.
> (Note: dcterms:identifier on oslc:Publusher - §A.6 - has an "unspecified" read-only value. Should it be consistent with the others?)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)