OSLC CORE TC Minutes April 27, 2017

["Sarabura, Martin" <msarabura@ptc.com>]

Scribe

• Nick Crossley (IBM)

Attendees

• David Honey (IBM)
• Harish Krishnaswamy (Software AG)
• Jad El-khoury (KTH)
• Jim Amsden (IBM)
• Martin Sarabura (PTC)
• Nick Crossley (IBM)
• Bill Chown (Mentor Graphics)

Regrets

Resolutions

Actions

• Martin to write up formal proposal, to be voted on next meeting (on the quality/nature/contents of acceptable Statements of Use)
• Jim to ask whether a summer co-op may be available to work on the v3 reference implementation
• Jim to look at moving the Eclipse 3.0 implementation to Github
• Jim to poll the OSLC community on the subject

Chat transcript from room: oslc

[07:04] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick to scribe

[07:04] Nick Crossley (IBM): List of attendees: David Honey (Persistent/IBM), Harish K (Software AG), Jad El-khoury (KTH), Jim Amsden (IBM), Martin Sarabura (PTC), Nick Crossley (IBM), anonymous

[07:04] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Bill Chown joining....

[07:05] Martin Sarabura (PTC): https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/Meetings/Telecon2017.03.30

[07:05] Nick Crossley (IBM): https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/Meetings/Telecon2017.04.13

[07:06] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Ian Green to be added to attendee list

[07:06] Nick Crossley (IBM): Both accepted

[07:07] Nick Crossley (IBM): Next meeting May 11th

[07:09] Nick Crossley (IBM): Action item: Martin to write up formal proposal, to be voted on next meeting (on the quality/nature/contents of acceptable Statements of Use) [07:10] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim says: 1. OSLC 3 Core is compatible OSCL 2 Core

[07:10] Nick Crossley (IBM): 2. OSLC Core 3 doesn't add anything substantial that's new other than attachments

[07:11] Nick Crossley (IBM): 3. Core 3 provides optional ways to access OSLC capabilities through LDP mechanisms such as link headers, containers, etc.

[07:11] Nick Crossley (IBM): 4. There are many existing OSLC 2 clients and servers in the marketplace

[07:12] Nick Crossley (IBM): 4. There are many existing successful OSLC 2 clients and servers in the marketplace

[07:12] Nick Crossley (IBM): That is, they support the intended tools and integrations

[07:12] Nick Crossley (IBM): The demand for access to these capabilities through LDP is currently low

[07:12] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin asked if that was really a chicken and egg situation

[07:14] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: market uptake on RDF and SPARQL, and then on LDP, has been less than expected - and now may have been overtaken by NoSQL, graph databases, etc.

[07:15] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: because of all this, and because of the additional slowdown caused by the move from open-services.net to OASIS, the TC should consider OSLC 2 SoU to be acceptable as OSLC 3 SoUs

[07:16] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin wondered if other standards efforts had been in similar situations.

[07:20] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick: any Core 2.0 SoU is already a valid SoU of at least parts of Core 3.0, so I think Jim's proposal is a statement of life as is it anyway.

[07:21] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick & Martin agreed it is a question of risk and coverage - we'd like to get at least some coverage of newer features in the SoUs to reduce the risk that there are defects in those newer parts of the standard.

[07:22] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: a complete reference implementation would eliminate that risk.

[07:23] Bill Chown (Mentor Graphics)4: having very odd connection problems today - apologies for the multiple entries!

[07:26] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: we have the existing 3.0 reference implementation. Jim thinks it would not take too much work to get this into shape to validate the newer LDP aspects of the standard.

[07:27] Nick Crossley (IBM): The combination of existing 2.0 SoU plus the new 3.0 reference implementation would cover both older and newer stuff.

[07:29] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin: do we have anyone willing to do that work on the 3.0 reference implementation?

[07:30] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jad: would need to be able to make an academic project out of it, and would need some of Jad's time to supervise. Could possibly be a summer task.

[07:30] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: might be a task for an IBM summer co-op.

[07:31] Nick Crossley (IBM): Do we have any contacts to suggest this as a Google Summer of Code exercise?

[07:33] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin: action items: Jim to ask for a summer co-op.

[07:34] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin: action item for Jad to look for summer student effort.

[07:35] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin: all other TC members to look for possible resources for this - look at existing OSLC 3.0 reference implementation on Lyo, and ensure it is compatible with revised Core 3.0.

[07:36] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: 3.0 reference implementation is much more simple code than 2.0.

[07:36] Nick Crossley (IBM): It's currently called a sample, not a reference implementation.

[07:36] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin: let's revisit this in 2 weeks.

[07:39] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: what we want to do is agree as a TC what is the acceptable level of risk and coverage in the SoU, and to have that written down.

[07:39] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: we'll want that documented so we can describe the criteria to the Steering Committee to get their approval of the standard.

[07:41] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: acton item to move the OSLC 3.0 sample/reference implementation from Eclipse to Github - it's stand-alone, makes it more accessible, and the dev process easier

[07:41] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick: I second that

[07:41] Nick Crossley (IBM): Not on mute

[07:42] Nick Crossley (IBM): Don't know why you can't heat

[07:42] Nick Crossley (IBM): hear

[07:44] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim will send a note about this to the OSLC Community

[07:44] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: about publishing files to open-services.net: has all the info, but not yet done. Another action item to revisit in 2 weeks.

[07:45] Nick Crossley (IBM): On TRS: Nick has the pen, but has not yet been able to do any work on it. Will send out a note when done.

[07:46] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick: I'll be out from May 1-10, so no progress will be made till then.

[07:47] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick: Updates to template spec for domains TC is in the same state - that is, no progress.

[07:48] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim: Meanwhile, Mark Schulte has edited an Architecture Management draft.

[07:49] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick also wants (needs?) to get some ReSpec enhancements done before we have to publish a whole batch of Domains TC specs

[07:50] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick: improving (or rewriting!) ReSpec would also be a good summer task for a student or intern

[07:51] Nick Crossley (IBM): No other business

[07:51] Nick Crossley (IBM): Meeting adjourned