Tack,

I don't think there will be too many clients written that operate with
different domain specs.  Different implementations of the same spec yes,
but not different domain specifications.  Now, if the domain specification
did not require at least one representation to be supported then yes, your
concerns are valid.  However I think the discussion here is "should all
core 2.0 derived specifications require one common representation?"  In
this case I don't see the real need.  Rather, we _should_ make sure that
all domain specs require at least one common representation (rdf/xml  or
json for example).


<jim/>

jim conallen
[email protected]
Rational Software, IBM Software Group





From:       Tack Tong <[email protected]>
To:         [email protected]
Cc:         [email protected],
            [email protected]
Date:       07/26/2010 12:44 PM
Subject:    [oslc-core]  "One last" change to OSLC Core representations
Sent by:    [email protected]



+1 for me on Andy's comment.


I second Samit's concern that unless there is a representation used by all
providers, a client writing code would then have to write separate code for
each provider, which they could do without OSLC by using the native api of
the provider.

Andy Berner



Tack Tong
IBM Rational software
[email protected]
905-413-3232
tie line 313-3232_______________________________________________
Oslc-Core mailing list
[email protected]
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net

Reply via email to