|
I agree with Jimâs suggestion for the existing domains specs.
I donât see the added-value in reorganizing.
Jad
Regarding the domain specifications, I wouldn't object to anyone wanting to reorganize the content in the existing domains specifications to use this new conformance clause ReSpec feature.
But I'm inclined to suggest we not do that for existing domain specifications, but use it for new specifications. The reason is that I'm not sure the base requirements in the table (now moved to the Conformance section) are
completely covered in the body of the document. It would be necessary to go through each one and copy it to the appropriate section/subsection in the body of the document.
This could be done, but the resulting document would be quite different than the 2.0 versions. Since we are trying to only migrate the 2.0 documents, I think it may be important to preserve their content and format as much as
possible to avoid introducing unintended changes.
Thoughts?
Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member
OSLC and Linked Lifecycle Data
919-525-6575
From: "Nicholas Crossley" <nick_crossley@us.ibm.com>
To: oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org,
oslc-domains@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: 07/03/2018 04:53 AM
Subject: [oslc-domains] Initial documentation for ReSpec conformance clause handling
Sent by: <oslc-domains@lists.oasis-open.org>
Fellow OSLC TC members,
As discussed in meetings last week, I spent some time updating ReSpec to generate conformance sections and clauses, and I completed initial testing of those changes early this week. One thing that I said I would do, but have not, is to number the conformance
clauses relative to the section number in which they appear. I ran out of time to complete that work, so the numbering is purely sequential across one entire source file. Since such numbering is not stable anyway, it will not break anything if I improve that
in the future.
Formatting is done using CSS styles with a default stylesheet 'conformance.css' built into ReSpec - if necessary, you could override those with styles you provide.
I have not yet had time to convert/upload my notes on the changes to a wiki, so I'm including them as a Word document attached to this email. At some point, we should set up the OASIS ReSpec wiki - but possibly not until we have a truly permanent home for it,
not in my personal github account.
Since we now have a ReSpec that can generate documents acceptable to OASIS staff without considerable manual post-processing, and since the changes in this new rev were quite significant, I have updated the version number from 0.3.x to 1.0.0.
The last stable version in the 0.3.x line is 0.3.8. The versions 0.3.9 and 0.3.10 were intermediate builds for testing while running from the github server, and should be ignored. If you want to revert, use 0.3.8.
I welcome comments, questions, and other feedback.
Nick.
[attachment "Conformance Clauses in ReSpec 1.docx" deleted by Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM] [attachment "conformance.css" deleted by Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
|