+1 That makes sense to me. -Rob
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Steve K Speicher <[email protected]>wrote: > Regarding the resolution of this issue: > > http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreV1Issues > RESOLVED recommend renaming oslc:context to oslc:scope due to potential > missunderstanding in ALM industry > (*RobertElves*<http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/RobertElves>03/30/2010) > *Response* Done. We now use oslc:scope and describe it as "The scope of a > resource is a link to the resource's > ServiceProvider*?*<http://open-services.net/bin/edit/Main/ServiceProvider?topicparent=Main.OslcCoreV1Issues>." > > Since this property is a link to the ServiceProvider resource, why don't we > just call it oslc:serviceProvider ? I think oslc:scope could still be > misleading: change request is scoped to this iteration, etc. > > Robert, since you raised this issue what are your thoughts? > > Thanks, > Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645 > > _______________________________________________ > Oslc-Core mailing list > [email protected] > http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net > > -- Robert Elves Tasktop Developer, http://tasktop.com/ Mylyn Committer, http://eclipse.org/mylyn
