I didn't hear any objection to this, so I made this change http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecDRAFT#Appendix_A_Common_Properties
Thanks, Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645 [email protected] wrote on 04/12/2010 11:17:45 AM: > From: Robert Elves <[email protected]> > To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS > Cc: [email protected] > Date: 04/12/2010 11:17 AM > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] OSLC properties oslc:scope > Sent by: [email protected] > > +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 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? ." > > 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
