Next in thread →
Next in month →
Re: [oslc-core] Namespace for OSLC Availability (Automation) spec
Martin, (All, to be clear, Martin's question is direction to the open-services.net Core WG, not the OASIS TC...they are just informed/CC'd) >> What do the members of OSLC Core suggest as to which namespace to use? If truly a new spec, then I'd suggest a new top-level name such as your option #2. BUT... Thinking about options 1 and 3, I had to read the spec a bit more to understand how "close" it is to those domains. It does appear to be closely aligned or even coupled with automation. It may depend on how many new terms are being defined. I see a handful of Classes and about 8 Properties. Seems containable in existing vocabulary. Since the intent is to eventually submit this to the OASIS OSLC Automation TC, it may just make sense to add into automation namespace (option #1). Does the WG have a preference? I assume the new availability one (option #2), since it is already in the draft spec. If work is occurring at open-services.net, can't use OASIS namespace. That is very clear (not even an option). Unless you submit the "working draft" to OASIS and then the TC takes on the task of assigning a namespace (as you call out). Side note, why is this being done wiki-like in PDF? Seems like it would be easier to track changes and review it if done like other specs. Thanks, Steve Speicher IBM Rational Software OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net From: Arthur Ryman <> To: Martin P Pain <> Cc: , , Oslc-Core <> Date: 08/12/2014 04:28 PM Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Namespace for OSLC Availability (Automation) spec Sent by: "Oslc-Core" <> Martin, My thoughts - If this work is a modification of an existing spec, then I think it's simplest if you add any new terms to the existing namespace. If this work is a new spec then use a new namespace. If the work is not being done at OASIS then don't use an OASIS namespace. Regards, ___________________________________________________________________________ Arthur Ryman, PhD Chief Data Officer, Rational Chief Architect, Portfolio & Strategy Management Distinguished Engineer | Master Inventor | Academy of Technology Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) | +1-416-939-5063 (mobile) From: Martin P Pain <> To: , Cc: Date: 08/08/2014 04:53 AM Subject: [oslc-core] Namespace for OSLC Availability (Automation) spec Sent by: "Oslc-Core" <> There is work going on in the OSLC Automation WG (at open-services.net) to develop a vocabulary and specification for automation for control of high availability of IT services/resources. The most recent shared draft of the work is here: http://open-services.net/wiki/automation/Availability-Specification/ (although there are some changes being worked on as a result of the most recent feedback & discussions that are not represented in that draft - in particular, that fact affects this email as some of the predicates are being removed because the in-scope scenarios do not require them, so not all of the predicates in that draft will be being added to a vocabulary). A question has come up over what namespace this specification should use for its vocabulary. The options that I'm aware of are: 1) Use the OSLC Automation namespace: http://open-services.net/ns/auto# 2) Create a new namespace for availability in open-services.net, e.g: http://open-services.net/ns/availability# 3) Use the Common IT Resource Type Vocabulary [1]: http://open-services.net/ns/crtv# 4) Create a new namespace for availability in oasis-open.org, e.g. http://docs.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/ns/availability or http://docs.oasis-open.org/oslc-automation/ns/availability The issues that affect this choice: A) This is a 2.0 spec being developed at open-services.net (which is why I have sent this to the maintenance-mode OSLC Core WG there) so an OASIS namespace is probably not appropriate. B) As development of this spec has taken longer than expected, it has been suggested we move it to the OASIS OSLC Automation TC. No decision has yet been made. (I have copied the OSLC Core TC @ OASIS on this email, for this reason and because it is active.) And if we do move to OASIS, the debate about namespaces there may delay this spec still further. C) While the scenarios for which we are developing relate to automated control of availability (so the automation namespace may be appropriate) the vocabulary could equally be used just for reporting/declaring/exposing the current state of an IT resource as regards high availability, so it might make sense for the terms to go in the Common IT Resource Type Vocabulary - assuming we intend to maintain that vocabulary (that is, if we are interested in making it a useful reusable set of terms - the current wiki page doesn't indicate this). What do the members of OSLC Core suggest as to which namespace to use? Thanks, Martin [1] http://open-services.net/wiki/reconciliation/Common-IT-Resource-Type-Vocabulary-Version-2.0/ Martin Pain Software Developer - Green Hat Rational Test Virtualization Server, Rational Test Control Panel OASIS Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration - Automation technical committee chair E-mail: Find me on: and within IBM on: IBM United Kingdom Limited Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU 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 _______________________________________________ Oslc-Core mailing list http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net _______________________________________________ Oslc-Core mailing list http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
Next in thread →
Next in month →