← Prev in month ← Prev in thread

OSLCCORE-35: v2 Resource Shape oslc:Inline property incorreclty mentions blank nodes

From
Martin P Pain <>
Date
2015-09-02T16:52:43+00:00
ID
Thread
OSLCCORE-35: v2 Resource Shape oslc:Inline property incorreclty mentions blank nodes
While looking at the tables in OSLC v2
for the discovery resources (which use resource shape terminology, in particular
the "valueType" and "representation" columns) I realised
that the vocab file's definition of oslc:Inline does not seem correct.

For more info see the JIRA I raised:
https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OSLCCORE-35

This has also raised the question in
my mind as to whether most of the places in the v2 spec (or at least the
discovery part) that say oslc:LocalResource for the "value type"
(which requires use of a blank node - an RDF resource without a URI) ought
to say oslc:AnyResource for "value type" and oslc:Inline for
"representation" - the only difference (as far as I'm aware)
is that the latter allows the resources to have a URI (which may or may
not be a hash URI) - but still requires their representation to be inlined.
I can't see any benefit to either clients or servers of requiring a blank
node. I also don't think that would be a backwards-incompatible change,
as clients who can deal with blank nodes should be able to deal with inlined
representations (it's making the change the other way round that might
break clients).

Any thoughts on either the vocab or
the spec? I wouldn't be surprised if I've missed something.

Martin
Pain

Software Developer - Green Hat

Rational Test Virtualization Server, Rational Test Control Panel

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
← Prev in month ← Prev in thread