I consider all of these to be good changes, minor and low-impact, so I went ahead and applied them to the spec.
- Dave On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Arthur Ryman <[email protected]> wrote: > Some issues with Resource Shapes [1] > > 1. The description of oslc:propertyDefinition is not clear. The property > name suggests it refers to some definition. However, I assume it refers to > the URI of the property whose shape is being described. The description > reads: > > Definition of the property whose usage is being described. > > Shouldn't it be: > > URI of the property whose usage is being described. > > 2. There are two uses of the property oslc:allowedValue. One refers to an > oslc:AllowedValues resource. The other inlines an allowed value. I suggest > we rename the first usage to oslc:allowedValues. > > 3. oslc:representation is defined as a String whose values are: > 'Reference' or 'Inline' or 'Either' . The recommended design for this > situation is to use URIs, which is what is used for oslc:valueType. > Following that design I suggest we use the following URIs > > http://open-service.net/ns/core#Reference > http://open-service.net/ns/core#Inline > http://open-service.net/ns/core#Either > > [1] > http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecAppendixA?sortcol=table;up=#oslc_ResourceShape_Resource > > Regards, > ___________________________________________________________________________ > > Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE > > > Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management > > IBM Software, Rational > > Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063 > Twitter | Facebook | YouTube > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Oslc-Core mailing list > [email protected] > http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net >
