+1
Makes sense to me. Earlier when
I was reviewing the spec I didn't like there that were 2 spec'd ways of
doing nearly the same thing.
Steve Speicher
IBM Rational Software
OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net
<> wrote on 08/21/2014
03:07:43 PM:
> From: Samuel Padgett/Durham/IBM@IBMUS
> To: "OASIS OSLC Core TC Discussion List"
<>
> Date: 08/21/2014 03:08 PM
> Subject: [oslc-core] Proposal to remove Link
header option from Resource Preview spec
> Sent by: <>
>
> I suggest we remove the Compact Link header [1] in favor of an oslc:compact
> property. We would also remove oslc:compacts (the inverse). My reasoning:
> 1. We're already using 'compact' in the Prefer
response.
> 2. We use property 'compact' for our JSON and
inverse property 'compacts'
> elsewhere. This is inconsistent and confusing.
> 3. Compact resources can be included in a query
response as discussed during
> the call today (e.g., oslc.select=*,oslc.compact{*})
>
> Then if you GET a resource (no Prefer header), it would have a triple
>
> <> <oslc:compact> <compact-uri>
>
> or optionally have the Compact representation inlined.
>
> With the Prefer header, it would continue to look like Example 3 [2].
>
> [1] http://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/oslc-core/specs/
> resource-preview.html#linkHeader
> [2] http://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/oslc-core/specs/
> resource-preview.html#preferenceAppliedJsonLDExample
> --
> Samuel Padgett | IBM Rational |
> Eclipse Lyo: Enabling tool integration with OSLC
