+1  I have optimistically updated the spec and will tee this up for
discussion in the next workgroup meeting.

Regards,
Mike

Michael Fiedler
IBM Rational Software
[email protected]
919-254-4170


                                                                       
             David N                                                   
             Brauneis/Raleigh/                                         
             IBM@IBMUS                                                  To
             Sent by:                  Charles Rankin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS,
             oslc-automation-b                                          cc
             ounces@open-servi         [email protected],
             ces.net                   oslc-automation-bounces@open-servic
                                       es.net                          
                                                                   Subject
             09/13/2012 04:22          Re: [Oslc-Automation] Regarding 
             PM                        oslc_auto:verdict in     OSLC
                                       automation       spec                 
                                                                       
                                                                       
                                                                       
                                                                       
                                                                       
                                                                       




I agree with Charles - I like the changes for pass -> passed, warn ->
warning, and fail -> failed but would prefer to see erroneous be error.

Regards,
David
____________________________________________________
David Brauneis
STSM, Rational Software Delivery Automation Chief Architect
email: [email protected] | phone: 720-395-5659 | mobile: 919-656-0874



From:        Charles Rankin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
To:        [email protected],
Date:        09/13/2012 03:17 PM
Subject:        Re: [Oslc-Automation] Regarding oslc_auto:verdict in OSLC
automation        spec
Sent by:        [email protected]



[email protected] wrote on 09/13/2012 09:34:09 AM:

> From: Xin Peng Liu <[email protected]>
>
> I looked through the latest spec, and found for the several values of
> oslc_auto:verdict, seems not all of them are of the same part of
> speech, but for oslc_auto:state, the values are consistent to be
> adjective. I assume values of oslc_auto:verdict should all be adjective
> or noun (better adjective).

That sounds like a reasonable request

> If all adjective, then we get:
> http://open-services.net/ns/auto#unavailable
> http://open-services.net/ns/auto#passed
> http://open-services.net/ns/auto#warning
> http://open-services.net/ns/auto#failed
> http://open-services.net/ns/auto#erroneous

I like this version better.  I definitely like changing pass->passed and
fail->failed.  I'm not keen on "erroneous".  I think that "error", while
not an adjective, actually reads well and feels better.  If you plug them
all into the sentence "The automation is in a/an <state> state", they all
read fine.

Charles Rankin_______________________________________________
Oslc-Automation mailing list
[email protected]
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-automation_open-services.net
_______________________________________________
Oslc-Automation mailing list
[email protected]
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-automation_open-services.net

Reply via email to