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: Re: [oslc-core] Fw: helping out with TRS spec

re TBD5 - the base paging is related to change log processing in the following way.

Suppose we have a client reading the TRS from a server. The server last calculated the base on Jan 1st at noon. The client starts reading that base late on Jan 12th. Early on Jan 13th, the client is still reading the 5th page out of 10 base pages. At that time, the server decides to rebase - calculate a new base and prune the change log so it goes back to Jan 6th, keeping 7 days behind the new Jan 13th base as recommended by the standard.

Now the client issues a request to read the 6th base page. If the server returns the 6th page of the new base, the client may miss some resources entirely as there is no guarantee the resources are in the same order or the same pages. If the server preserves the old base and returns the 6th page of that, there's still a problem - the new change log does not go back as far as the old base, so change events from Jan 1st to Jan 6th are missing.

At this point, the best thing the server can do is fail the attempt to read the 6th base page, probably returning a 409. In order to do this, the server needs to recognize that a base page request is for an out of date set of pages. For example, the server could encode some information about the base age in the paging query string of the URL for second and subsequent pages.

For TBD 6, we agreed in this week's Core meeting to separate the Access Control part to a separate spec or part (TBD).


From:        David Honey1 <DavidHoney@uk.ibm.com>
To:        "Jim Amsden" <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
Cc:        "OASIS OSLC Core TC Discussion List" <oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date:        02/02/2018 09:25 AM
Subject:        Re: [oslc-core] Fw: helping out with TRS spec
Sent by:        <oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org>

Re TBD3: The support for Etag and HEAD relates to the tracked resources rather than the TRS resources such a tracked resource set, change log, base page. I think that might be better covered in the core spec rather than TRS spec. I think all resources SHOULD support ETag. MAY is too weak. The Etag is important to support caching.  But I think that support for HEAD should be a MAY rather than SHOULD.

Re TBD4: We should stick the term "page" rather than "segment". OSLC Core already uses that term.

Best regards,

"Jim Amsden" <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
"OASIS OSLC Core TC Discussion List" <oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org>
29/01/2018 18:03
[oslc-core] Fw: helping out with TRS spec
Sent by:        

Forwarding for broader discussion on the core mailing list as others may be able to provide more informed opinions.

Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member

OSLC and Linked Lifecycle Data


----- Forwarded by Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM on 01/29/2018 12:59 PM -----

Axel Reichwein <axel.reichwein@koneksys.com>
Jim Amsden <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
"Sarabura, Martin" <msarabura@ptc.com>
01/28/2018 10:25 PM
RE: helping out with TRS spec

Hello Jim,

I just reviewed the TBDs in


1.       TBD1 is related to updating the CSS o make all uses of RFC2119 words use the rfc2119 style
2.       TBD2 - TRS Client, or simply, client – my preference would be to use the term “TRS client”, and no definition is needed according to me
3.       TBD3: “The TRS Server should support ETags, caching, and conditional GETs for Tracked Resources; TBD: TRS Servers may support ETags, caching, and conditional GETs for Tracked Resource Sets and Base resources.” -  replace “should” by “may”
4.       TBD4: Paged Base definition is missing.
5.       TBD5: “TBD: If paging of the base is supported (see other TBD section), then the server should take care to avoid mismatching pairing of a new change log with the old base and vice versa.” – I personally think that this does not need to be explained as the Base and the Change Log are of different type and would  be segmented each in their own way.
6.       TBD6: Access Context -

How about this text for TBD4: “”Often, the number of member Resources in the Base will grow to the point where it is not reasonable to contain all the Resources in a single HTTP response. In this case, the base member Resources may be segmented into separate resources. There can be any number of such base member Resource segments, each one containing a subset of all  base member Resource segments.

Regarding TBD6: Access Context, it seems to me that Access Context is an orthogonal topic to OSLC resources in general, and it is not specific to TRS. I don’t think that Access Context should be standardized in an OSLC spec.

I’m not sure if the TBDs all correspond to an existing issue. I guess the list of existing issues is more specifically what I should be looking at


I guess that I should add my comments to the issues? Or should I just review the existing spec at

and potentially create new issues?

There are really many issues related to TRS…Are there any issues that I should tackle first? Do we have a deadline?

Best regards,

Jim Amsden [
Tuesday, November 14, 2017 7:16 AM
Axel Reichwein
Re: helping out with TRS spec

Thanks for volunteering, we welcome broader input in order to promote effective integration technologies.

Instructions for editing documents are from the OSLC Domains TC Wiki:
https://github.com/oasis-tcs/oslc-domains/wiki. These apply to OSLC Core spec too.

OSLC Core issues are in Jira:
https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OSLCCORE-93?jql=project%20%3D%20OSLCCORE. TRS issues are in the TRS Component. Create whatever issues you want to manage your work.

Subversion is used for SCM:

TRS specs are here:

Send Robin Cover <
robin@oasis-open.org> a note to get write access to SVN. I use Subclipse, but there are other SVN clients you can use.

I have done and checked in the following based on the actions from last week's meeting:

1. added the tracked-resource-set-vocab.html document. This needs some editing, I just copied a template and added the ReSpec processing of the TRS domain vocabulary and shapes. This is also part 2 of a multi-part specification. So those two parts need to be added to the tracked-resource-set.html document too. See the CM spec for an example on how to do this:

2. I added the TRS Patch section back into the tracked-resource-set.html document

3. I was suppose to add the Access Control section back, but I found it was already there. Maybe I missed something.

4. I created an initial draft of the trs-guidance.html document and put the old content in there.

Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member

OSLC and Linked Lifecycle Data


Axel Reichwein <axel.reichwein@koneksys.com>
"nick_crossley@us.ibm.com" <nick_crossley@us.ibm.com>
Jim Amsden <jamsden@us.ibm.com>, "msarabura@ptc.com" <msarabura@ptc.com>
11/14/2017 09:46 AM
helping out with TRS spec

Hello Nick, Jim, Martin,

As I volunteered to help out with the TRS spec, could you share with me some documents on how to do it? Will I be assigned Jira issues to keep track of my tasks?

Best regards,

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

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