OSLC RM Domain specs

Hi,

I raised the issue of RM 2.0 compatibility with OSLCCore3.0, and here’s an example (I think I earlier found another example, but let’s first test if I understood compatibility correct):

OSLC Core 3.0, states that OSLC Services MUST provide and accept text/turtle

http://docs.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/oslc-core/v3.0/cs01/part1-overview/oslc-core-v3.0-cs01-part1-overview.html#resourceRepresentations

RM 2.0 only requires MUST for RDF/XML representations.

Now, if we state that RM 2.0 specification is based on OSLCCore3.0, does that not create a backward compatibility issues for RM2.0? Existing RM 2.0 implementations have not necessarily supported turtle.

Also, note that I have also just committed some new changes to the RM Specs.

I earlier called the specs 3.0, but now I understand we should stick to 2.0. So, I now renamed it 2.0.

This also meant I have reverted changes to the following sections to be almost the same text as that under open-services:

* 2.2 Specification Versioning

* Appendix A. Version Compatibility with 2.0 Specifications

regards

______________________________

Jad El-khoury, PhD

KTH Royal Institute of Technology

School of Industrial Engineering and Management, Mechatronics Division

Brinellvägen 83, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden

Phone: +46(0)8 790 6877 Mobile: +46(0)70 773 93 45

jad@kth.se, www.kth.se

oslc-domains message