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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

oslc-core message

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

Subject: Minutes 2 April 2015

Online: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/Meetings/Telecon2015.04.02


chat transcript


Martin Sarabura (PTC)


Samuel Padgett (IBM)


Arnaud J Le Hors (IBM,) David Honey (IBM), Harish (Software AG), Jim Amsden (IBM), Julie DeMeester (Raytheon), Martin Pain (IBM), Martin Sarabura (PTC), Nick Crossley (IBM), Samuel Padgett (IBM)



  • Minutes of 5 March 2015 approved unanimously
  • Next TC call will be on 16 April 2015


  • Nick to discuss with Jim and Chet re having multiple work products in the CCM TC
  • Nick, Sam and Martin P to review state of Actions document so that it can be included in Core specification - due Apr 16
  • Martin S and Jim to scan Actions document for issues with the content - due Apr 16
  • Jim will take ownership of Discovery and Common Vocabulary
  • Sam to initiate Delegated Guidance Note

Roll Call

Chat transcript from room: oslc

[07:05] List of attendees: Arnaud J Le Hors (IBM), David Honey, Harish (Software AG), Harish (Software AG)1, Jim Amsden, Julie DeMeester, Martin Pain (IBM), Martin Sarabura (PTC), Samuel Padgett (IBM), anonymous

[07:05] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Sam is scribe

[07:06] Harish (Software AG)1: Martin:I use an India Toll number to dial into the US bridge.

[07:07] Martin Sarabura (PTC): https://ptc.webex.com/ptc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=355676237&tollFree=1

[07:07] Martin Sarabura (PTC): This is the list of global callin numbers

[07:07] Martin Sarabura (PTC): India toll free 0008-00852-1525

[07:09] Harish (Software AG)1: Thank you. Joining in a moment

Approval of Minutes of 5 March 2015

[07:11] Samuel Padgett (IBM): No objections

Next call: 16 April 2015

[07:12] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Introductions - we have a couple of new members

[07:12] Samuel Padgett (IBM): First, Jim Amsden from IBM

[07:12] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Jim: I've been with IBM for close to 20 years and Rational 11-12

[07:12] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Background in developing modeling tools. Also developed a WebDAV server, which became part of Eclipse

[07:13] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... I've also worked in OMG standards, including UML 2 and chair of SOA ML

[07:13] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Taking over Steve Speicher's role at IBM

[07:13] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... I've been a user of OSLC and a interest in Linked Data

[07:14] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Next, Julie DeMeester from Raytheon

[07:14] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Julie: I've been with Raytheon for 10 years

[07:15] David Honey morphed into David Honey (IBM)

[07:15] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... We have a corporate research project looking at OSLC linking

[07:15] Harish (Software AG)1 morphed into Harish (Software AG)

[07:15] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... We wanted to become involved in the standard

[07:16] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... In the past, we've developed some OSLC web services

[07:16] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Discussion: Document publish process

[07:17] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Martin S: Been in contact with Chat Ensign about the process

[07:17] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Some documents ready for public review, some are close, some are further away

[07:17] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... We can start down the standards track with all together as a multi-part work product or we could take them through each individually

[07:18] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Some documents are relatively far away from being ready

[07:19] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Do we want to take the subset that looks close to completion?

[07:23] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Sam: I believe it makes sense to go forward with a multi-part work product

[07:23] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... The documents that are behind are Actions, Link Guidance, and Compatibility

[07:24] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Actions will require significant work, so it might make sense to move that out of 3.0 into the next OSLC version (and 2.1 is in finalization at open-services.net)

[07:24] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Linking and compatibility seem important to leave in

[07:24] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Jim: I believe per the OASIS process, to have different work products requires different TCs

[07:25] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Another consideration is dependencies between specs, which is easier to manage as a multi-part work product

[07:27] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Martin: Should Compatibility be part of the 3.0 work product?

[07:28] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Jim: It might makes sense as a committee note because it's unusual for a standard to reference a previous version of the standard

[07:28] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Jim: I propose we queue up a topic for the next meeting to discuss interoperability with the previous OSLC version

[07:29] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Nick: I would have an issue leaving out the actions until the next version. Configuration management is dependent on that

[07:30] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Nick: I'd rather not have to formally reference the open-services.net 2.1 standard

[07:31] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... That split would be a problem for me. I can help with the action spec

[07:31] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Regarding the TCs: we did set up the CCM TC to have multiple work products (change management and configuration management)

[07:32] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Action: Nick will address that with Jim and Chet

[07:36] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Action: Nick, Sam, and Martin P will review state of document to come up with an estimate to get the current document up to shape

[07:37] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Action: Martin S and Jim will look at the content of the actions spec

[07:37] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Julie will begin reviewing the documents as well

[07:38] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Status update on drafts

[07:41] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Link Guidance - Jim is not as involved in OSLC. Ian is updating the Link Guidance document

[07:41] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Compatibility - Sam will take ownership. Resource preview section has been updated

[07:42] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Jim: Is there a requirement for 3.0 to have an interoperability story with 2.0?

[07:43] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... If there is a need, and I think there is, what are the implications on the actual design of 3.0 itself

[07:43] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Otherwise we create a barrier to adoption because there are a large number of 2.0 implementations

[07:44] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Nick: I agree. We need a very good compatibility and growth path

[07:45] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Discovery 3.0 - Jim will take ownership

[07:46] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Common Vocabulary - Jim will take ownership

[07:48] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Resource Preview Guidance - No update. Sam will own

[07:48] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Sam: I think it makes sense to include this as part of the OSLC 3.0 work product

[07:49] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Martin: No delegated UI guidance

[07:49] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Action: Sam will start a deleged dialogs guidance note

[07:49] Samuel Padgett (IBM): *delegated

[07:50] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Configuration Context Header

[07:51] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Nick: The configuration management spec requires a new HTTP header. The old one used an X- header that didn't need registration. At OASIS, we need a registered header with an RFC and proposal to IETF

[07:52] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... Unfortunately you can't take a proposal to IETF without a standard document (or draft that is in a near-finished state)

[07:52] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... We are waiting for a Configuration Management 3.0 Committee Specification

[07:54] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Jim: What about prior art in this area like WebDAV Delta-V that deals with Configuration Management?

[07:55] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Nick: They only addressed limited domains or limited scope in other ways. In OSLC, we're not attempting to define how a low-level config management tool works

[07:55] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... What we do specify is what the result of configuration management should look like

[07:55] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... and how you take configuration from different providers and glue those together into a virtual configuration

[07:56] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Martin S: What is the implication on this TC?

[07:57] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Nick: I don't there's any implication on the Core TC. The Core TC was involved in the first place because I approached for advice on whether we've applied for any other headers

[07:58] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Jim: Is there any way to include the information in the request or response body to avoid the situation?

[07:58] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Nick: The spec provides multiple ways to do this, including query strings on the URI

[07:59] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... the header was viewed as easier to implement for clients

[08:01] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Martin S: We're nearly out of time. I will table our discussion of the other emails until next meeting

[08:02] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... I'd like to mention that it would be beneficial for the committee to have a co-chair

[08:02] Samuel Padgett (IBM): ... If there's any interest, please let me know

[08:02] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Jim: I'm certainly interested. I'm new to the TC, so I'm hesitant to jump right in, but I'm certainly interested

[08:03] Arnaud J Le Hors (IBM): I think anyone foolish enough to reject a volunteer should have the burden of volunteering themselves ;-)

[08:03] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Martin S: The Automation TC is looking for a chair

[08:04] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Martin P: I plan to focus more on implementation rather than standards, and I'm stepping down as chair even though I plan to be involved to some degree

[08:06] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Martin S: Any last business?

[08:06] Samuel Padgett (IBM): Meeting adjourned


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