One of my comments to the proposers, in my occasional role as peanut gallery Core member, was the RPC-ish nature of the example. I suggested that it should just be a naked POST (no parameters); if a URI context is needed, the implementation can handle that transparently to the client via mechanisms like encoding it as a URI query parameter *within* the (opaque, to clients) action URI. Steve S seemed to agree, but I think revision of those pages is bottlenecked behind Sam P's paternity leave. The latter I think aligns exactly with what we discussed in terms of :teardown on Result resources. I realize it needs an example probably for anyone else to follow it, which is one thing I'm trying to get cranked out this week.
Best Regards, John Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario From: Martin P Pain <[email protected]> To: [email protected], Oslc-Automation <[email protected]>, Date: 08/29/2013 12:17 PM Subject: [Oslc-Automation] Reusing Cm's Actions for teardown/operations Sent by: "Oslc-Automation" <[email protected]> Having had another look at CM's Action resources, [1] I don't think they would be suitable for the use that we're discussing, as they define that to execute them you POST to the URL (resource) that is contained in the property on the resource that will be affected by the action, including the URI of that resource in the POST body. While in theory we could use this approach, it doesn't reflect what we've been discussing so far. Does anyone feel strongly that we should try and reuse this? I don't. Martin [1] http://open-services.net/wiki/change-management/Specification-3.0/#Resource_Action 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 _______________________________________________ Oslc-Automation mailing list [email protected] http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-automation_open-services.net
