OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

oslc-ccm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Comments on Change Management 3.0 draft

Terms 'provider' (often but not always 'service provider') and 'consumer' still used quite frequently

Section 2.1, Compliance, opening para: "makes reference to OSLC capabilities that are not yet defined in OSLC Core 3.0" -
what does that mean? Anything not yet in Core 3.0 will never be in Core 3.0, and we have no idea what might
or might not be in releases after that (if there ever are any).

Section 2.1, Compliance, Discovery, "OSLC servers MUST support OSLC Core 3.0 Discovery" - what does this mean? There's nothing
mandatory in Core 3.0 Discovery - no MUST or MUST NOT statements. It seems more accurate to say:
"OSLC servers SHOULD provide a ServiceProvider resource for Core v2 compatibility,
MAY provide a ServiceProviderCatalog, and MAY provide other forms of discovery described in Core 3.0 Discovery."
This issue also applies to section 4.1.

Compliance, Basic Authentication, should the 'should' in the https recommendation be 'SHOULD'?

Section 2.8.3 Updating Multi-Valued Properties - refers to a draft page. I do not think this reference
should be considered valid for public review or later stages of this spec, and anyway, LD Patch supersedes
any such mechanism. I suggest the entire section be removed.

Core 3.0 references are wrong (missing the /trunk part of the path)

Line 69 and line 75, oslc:authorizor and oslc:parent, shouldn't this be oslc_cm,
as well as the oslc: in the isDefinedBy?

line 376,384, oslc_cm:state and status
See our open action item to resolve this for RTC. Meanwhile, this is unsatisfactory for CM 3.0 - we have
a reference to a dead 2.0 note as the only way to change state?

ShapeChecker errors
oslc:valueType can't be oslc:Either - that's a representation. You presumably meant oslc:AnyResource, or oslc:Resource.
vs:term_status is a vocabulary term, and should not be applied to a property definition.
(We do not currently have a way of marking an entire property as deprecated - only hidden.)


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]