I believe it should be referring to the recognition rule, not "provider 
restrictions".

In addition, "that resource MUST conform to the requirements placed on 
those resources by the OSLC Automation specification. " should probably 
move to "additional provider constraints", instead of being under the 
recognition rule, as it's not needed for pattern recognition.



Martin Pain
Software Developer - Green Hat
Rational Test Virtualization Server, Rational Test Control Panel
Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration - Automation WG joint chair

E-mail: [email protected]
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

"Oslc-Automation" <[email protected]> wrote on 
18/03/2014 17:01:44:

> From: John Arwe <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected], 
> Date: 18/03/2014 17:02
> Subject: [Oslc-Automation] Actions 2.0: additional provider 
> constraints reference from Automation Request IP to Fixed Body IP 
> appears to be dangling
> Sent by: "Oslc-Automation" <[email protected]>
> 
> [1] says (under its recognition rule): it MUST adhere to the 
> provider restrictions of the HTTP request with fixed body 
> interaction pattern, 
> 
> Following my nose to the fixed body section [2], I fall off of known
> space looking for the restrictions.  I know we probably missed a 
> change from "restrictions" to "constraints", but at this point 
> *only* [1] has the "addl provider constraints" heading or anything 
similar. 
> 
> Is the statement in [1] simply vacuous at this point, so I should 
> remove it?  Martin, my guess is that you are the mostly likely 
> expert in this section of the material.  AFAIK it's only you and I 
> that have been mucking with the actions/IP text in this area. 
> 
> I don't see anything about http:body in [1], so I'm suspecting that 
> it should be referring back to the recognition rule for FB instead 
> of the to its "provider restrictions".  I can tilt my head such that
> "provider restrictions" comes to mean the http:body linkage, but it 
> does give me a crick in the neck doing so.  I doubt anyone outside 
> the WG would reasonably read it that way. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://open-services.net/wiki/core/Exposing-arbitrary-actions-
> on-RDF-resources/#pattern-autoreq 
> [2] http://open-services.net/wiki/core/Exposing-arbitrary-actions-
> on-RDF-resources/#pattern-body-repn 
> Best Regards, John
> 
> Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages 
> Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario 
> _______________________________________________
> Oslc-Automation mailing list
> [email protected]
> 
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-automation_open-services.net


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

Reply via email to