Re: [camp-comment] Discrepancy in Plan file specification : CAMP V1.1 ?

[Anish Karmarkar <anish.karmarkar@oracle.com>]

Hi Harish,

Thanks for your comment and for pointing out the bug in CAMP 1.1 spec.

The Technical Committee recently resolved an issue 
(https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/CAMP-176) that replaces all 
"*_type" with "type" since the context makes it very clear what kind of 
type it is. This will be included in an updated version of CAMP.

Hope this helps.

If you are not trying to be complaint with CAMP 1.1 Committee 
Specification, I would suggest using just "type".

Thanks.

-Anish
CAMP TC chair
--

On 4/3/15 5:22 AM, Harish Vishwanath wrote:
> Hello
>
> I am trying to play with camp v1.1 spec. I am finding a discrepancy in
> the sample camp.yaml excerpts.
>
> - The initial sections talking about plan (camp.yaml) file shows the key
> for identifying node types as artifact_type, requirement_type,
> characteristic_type and so on.
>
> However, in section 4.3.4 that talks about ContentSpecification, the
> prefix for type is omitted. The example shows
>
> artifacts:
> type:
>
> requirements:
> type:
> and so on.
>
> What is the recommendation?
>
> Regards,
> Harish