Re: [oslc-core] Meeting minutes 19-Feb-2015

[Steve K Speicher <sspeiche@us.ibm.com>]

Thanks Lonnie for the feedback, I'll play
around a bit with yUml.  I'm not looking for just a modelling tool
per say.  We have a need to draw some big animal pictures: how dialogs
work together, how spec development organizations relate and then yes in
some domains we have the need to model resources (classes and properties)
and their relationship to other models.

Thanks,
Steve Speicher
IBM Rational Software
OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net

<oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org> wrote on 02/19/2015
07:34:36 PM:

> From: "Lonnie VanZandt" <lvanzandt@sodius.com>
> To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
> Cc: "OASIS OSLC Core TC Discussion List"
<oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: 02/19/2015 07:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Meeting minutes 19-Feb-2015
> Sent by: <oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> If your drawings are relatively to the point (i.e. not governmental
> architecture framework diagrams) and you are not attempting to build
a 
> referentially consistent model repository then I can recommend yUml
(see 
> http://yuml.me/)
as a convenient tool and DSL to sketch UML-like object-
> relational diagrams.
> 
> For example, taken from their site, try this URL
> 
> http://yuml.me/diagram/scruffy/class/[note:
You can stick notes on diagrams 
> too!{bg:cornsilk}],[Customer]<>1-orders 0..*>[Order], [Order]++*-*>
> [LineItem], [Order]-1>[DeliveryMethod], [Order]*-*>[Product],
[Category]<->
> [Product], [DeliveryMethod]^[National], [DeliveryMethod]^[International]
> 
> If we are seeking a modeling tool then don’t settle for a drawing
tool. That
> is like loaning money at negative interest rates: penny-wise and pound-foolish.
> 
> 
> —
> Lonnie VanZandt
> 303-900-3048
> Sent from Dropbox's Mailbox on Mac
> 

> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Steve K Speicher
<sspeiche@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Online: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/Meetings/Telecon2015.02.19
> 
> Agenda 
> Roll Call 
> Approval of Minutes of 5 February 2015 
> Next call: 6 March 2015 
> Status update on drafts 
> Discovery 3.0 - near ready for review (see
embedded proposals) 
> Delegated Dialog - ready for review 
> Common Vocabulary 3.0 - ready for review,
incorporating feedback (review 
> Martin[s] feedback) 
> Overview 3.0 - done 
> Resource Preview 3.0 - done 
> Attachments 3.0 - done 
> Actions ? 
> any other updates? anything ready for review
now or by?
> Any other business 
> Adjourn
> Minutes 
> chat transcript 
> Chair 
> Steve Speicher (IBM) 
> Scribe 
> David Green (Tasktop Technologies) 
> Attendees 
> David Green (Tasktop Technologies), Martin Pain
(IBM), Nick Crossley (IBM), 
> Samuel Padgett (IBM), Steve Speicher (IBM), Harish (Software AG) 
> Regrets 
> Arnaud, Arthur, Ian, Martin S 
> Resolutions 
> Minutes of 5 February 2015 approved unanimously

> Next TC call will be on 5 March 2015 
> other stuff
> Actions 
> none
> Roll Call 
> [07:03] Steve Speicher (IBM): Agenda: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/
> Meetings/Telecon2015.02.19 
> [07:06] Steve Speicher (IBM): Regrets: Arnaud,
Arthur, Ian, Martin S 
> [07:06] Steve Speicher (IBM): Attendees: David
Green (Tasktop Technologies) 
> Martin Pain (IBM) Nick Crossley (IBM) Samuel Padgett (IBM) Steve Speicher
(IBM) 
> [07:08] Harish (Software AG): Harish joining
in. 
> [07:14] Steve Speicher (IBM): Attendees: + Harish
(Software AG) 
> [07:08] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): David
Green to scribe 
> [07:08] Steve Speicher (IBM): https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/
> Meetings/Telecon2015.02.05 
> [07:10] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Approval
of previous meeting 
> minutes: no objections, approved 
> Diagramming Tools 
> [07:14] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Discussion
about diagraming 
> tools, no decision 
> Steve Speicher: Looking to find a good simple
free diagramming tool for 
> specification author and general maintenance. Often times spec authors
use 
> proprietary tool and generate PNG, makes are for others to update.

> David Green: not really endorsing any tools,
though draw.io is a basic 
> service that has used before 
> Nick Crossley: has used ArgoUML as well 
> Spec Progress 
> [07:14] Steve Speicher (IBM): Discovery: http://tools.oasis-open.org/
> version-control/browse/wsvn/oslc-core/specs/discovery.html 
> [07:17] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Link
relation header: should we 
> put in a known predicate? Client reading feed could add a triple that
uses 
> the standard predicate. 
> [07:18] Steve Speicher (IBM): PROPOSED: Use a
standard predicate for feeding
> indexes based on link relationship type: <http://open-services.net/ns/
> core#creationType>; 
> [07:21] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): No
objections to using header 
> [07:22] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Section
5.3 of Discovery: 
> reusing LDP term "Constrained By" that takes a container
- link relation to 
> URI that describes constraints. 
> [07:22] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Could
be resource shapes, could 
> be HTML page, etc. 
> [07:22] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): proposal
to use a new term 
> rather than LDP term 
> [07:22] Steve Speicher (IBM): PROPOSED: define
a shape-specific relationship
> type, such as oslc:creationShape 
> [07:30] Martin Pain (IBM): The LDP spec says:
" LDP servers MUST publish any
> constraints on LDP clients ability to create or update LDPRs, by adding
a 
> Link header with an appropriate context URI, a link relation
of http://
> www.w3.org/ns/ldp#constrainedBy,
and a target URI identifying a set of 
> constraints [RFC5988], to all responses to requests that fail due
to 
> violation of those constraints." 
> [07:30] Martin Pain (IBM): "The same Link
header MAY be provided on other responses."
> [07:32] Steve Speicher (IBM): Leaning towards
using 
> oslc:creationConstrainedBy rel type 
> [07:35] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Delegated
dialog: conformance 
> section largely the same, doesn't mention window name 
> [07:36] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): requesting
feedback: 
> cardinality, required fields 
> [07:36] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): can
we reuse same shape with 
> statement "server must not reject prefill request because it's
missing 
> required fields", or change shape so that no fields are required

> [07:37] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Steve:
advise on not rejecting 
> request approach 
> [07:37] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): benefit
with shape reuse 
> [07:39] Martin Pain (IBM): https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/DelegatedUIUseCases

> [07:43] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): request
for reviewers 
> [07:44] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Samuel
to assist 
> [07:46] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Common
vocabulary: review 
> feedback received 
> [07:46] Steve Speicher (IBM): http://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/
> browse/wsvn/oslc-core/specs/common-vocab.html 
> [07:59] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Martin
proposing to contribute ...(what?)
> [08:01] Martin Pain (IBM): Martin will contribute
Actions 2.0 as the basis 
> for Actions 3.0 
> [08:01] David Green (Tasktop Technologies): Thanks
Martin 
> [08:01] Martin Pain (IBM): Martin also noted
that the Automatino TC will be 
> meeting to discuss whether & how to proceed with Automation 3.0

> Meeting Adjourned 
> 
> Thanks,
> Steve Speicher
> IBM Rational Software
> OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net