Re: [oslc-core] Motivation and proposal for oslc:archived property

Following up on this from previous discussions
within the TC (I also corrected the subject of this email to have the correct
term)

For a resource to be identified as being
"archived", it would have a triple of the form:

   <subject> oslc:archived
true .

In order to convert a resource to being
"not archived" to "archived", a server may provide
a PUT or PATCH method to update the property or some other means outside
of the specification.  Any given resource, at any state, should be
able to be archived (if the tool supports archiving).  For example,
even if a change request is in-progress or a requirement is under review,
it should be able to lock the state of that resource by marking it as "archived".

Being "archived" means that
a resource:

 - has been marked in such a way
that indicates additional changes/modifications to that resource are not
allowed and may exclude the resource from certain responses

 - removed by default from retrieving
lists of resources, such as query results

 - would (or would not) be included
into TRS feeds (need clarity on this)

 - allows for a way to query on
the resources that are marked archived or not

 - whether a UI may indicate a
link-to an archived resource should be excluded or visually indicate it
as archived

(of course we can refine this list)

Hopefully this clarifies some f

Thanks,

Steve Speicher

IBM Rational Software

OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net

From:      
 Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS

To:      
 "OASIS OSLC Core
TC Discussion List" <>

Date:      
 10/01/2014 09:01 AM

Subject:    
   [oslc-core]
Motivation and proposal for oslc:archive property

Sent by:    
   <>

Motivation: 

In typical lifecycle management tools, resources are rarely deleted.  They
instead are marked with such a state as not longer being "active"
or "available", some refer to this state as being "archived".
 By having a uniform way to express whether a resource is in this
state or not, allows for a consistent way to build queries and solutions
that federate information from various tools.

Proposal: 

The term for being archived would be

       http://open-services.net/ns/core#archived

and it would take a boolean value. If this property is absent then the
resource is not archived. 

This has a semantically different meaning than existing oslc:hidden [1],
which indicates a hint as to whether the resource or property should be
included in a UI.  oslc:archived would be used to express the state
of a resource, an application may or may not decide to hide these in the
UI. 

Timeframe: 

I suggest this be included in Core 3 common vocabulary.

[1]: http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecAppendixA#oslc_ResourceShape_Resource

Thanks,

Steve Speicher

IBM Rational Software

OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net