> Is this an issue of being able to categorize Automation providers so > it is possible to return Automation Plans for a given category > (e.g., Test vs Build).
The scenarios discussed all were UI-focused, as in: I know in my tool (or within a certain usage context within my tool) that only some subset of the universe of automation plans is relevant, so I want to filter the list I present to the user. Test/Build/Deploy were examples given (as the proposed URIs would suggest). An analogous case occurs when linking problems to RTC defects; the problem-oriented machinery wants to select from the list of CM providers for a given project, but RTC today exposes both CM and QM providers for each project. > If so did you discuss the ability to have > hierarchical categorization? Hierarchy did not come up specifically. I look at the problem as a general categorization issue, which is a superset of hierarchical categorization strategies. I think we have no hope of spec'ing out "the right" categories for every usage context, so I advocated for something extensible even if we provide a set of starter categories. Tagging seems like a nice fit to me, where pre-defined categories amount to built-in tags ... tags really being just orthogonal category terms, some of which might/not have relationships amongst themselves such as hierarchy. In this case the tag values are URIs (of course) so we have distributed extensibility. > The thought is that I may want to > search for all "test" providers and be able to select "performance > test" plans vs "functional test" plans. You're a good straight man ;-) Best Regards, John Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
