That looks good to me and matches our discussion today in the meeting. I believe that this belongs in Appendices B as an example of what a query response might look like if there is no shape defined for the query capability.
Assuming that your RDF/XML validates I can generate a Turtle representation for the Turtle appendix. We'll also want a JSON example for the JSON appendix that uses oslc:result, and a note in the Representation Guidance about using oslc:results in JSON. What other parts of spec and guidance should change, is that it? Thanks, - Dave On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Steve K Speicher <[email protected]> wrote: > Here's the what was discussed at today's Core WG meeting and proposed > changes: > > If no Query Resource Shape information is available, use defaults of > <rdf:Description> and <rdfs:member> > > <rdf:RDF > xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"; > xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"; > xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"; > xmlns:oslc="http://open-services.net/ns/core#";> > > <oslc:ResponseInfo rdf:about=" > http://example.com/myquery?oslc.query=oslc_cm.inprogress=true";> > <dcterms:title>Blog Service Query Results for term > [remote]</dcterms:title> > </oslc:ResponseInfo> > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.com/myquery";> > > <rdfs:member rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/5"; /> > <rdfs:member rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/4"; /> > <rdfs:member rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/1"; /> > <rdfs:member rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/2"; /> > <rdfs:member rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/3"; /> > > <!-- etc. etc. --> > > </rdf:Description> > > </rdf:RDF> > > For JSON, I think leaving the oslc:results is fine in this case since we > don't have a RDF standard for JSON we are based on > > Thanks, > Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645 > > > Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM wrote on 08/03/2010 07:20:45 PM: > >> From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM >> To: [email protected] >> Date: 08/03/2010 07:20 PM >> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposed change to JSON formatting rules >> for Query responses >> >> After re-reviewing the section on Member List Pattern from Query >> section [1], I would recommend this approach: >> >> In cases where Shape definition is not provided, use the default >> shape definition for query results where: >> >> Default membership property of <oslc:result> (notice singular form >> of results) on the resource type of <oslc:QueryResult> >> >> Note: for JSON the default would be to utilize "oslc:results" >> (notice plural form of result) for JSON array name (see thread below) >> >> Here's what it would look like in RDF/XML: >> >> <rdf:RDF >> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"; >> xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"; >> xmlns:oslc="http://open-services.net/ns/core#";> >> >> <oslc:ResponseInfo rdf:about=""> >> <dcterms:title>Blog Service Query Results for term [remote] >> </dcterms:title> >> </oslc:ResponseInfo> >> >> <oslc:QueryResult rdf:about=""> >> >> <oslc:result rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/5"; > /> >> <oslc:result rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/4"; > /> >> <oslc:result rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/1"; > /> >> <oslc:result rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/2"; > /> >> <oslc:result rdf:resource="http://example.com/blogs/comment/3"; > /> >> >> <!-- etc. etc. --> >> >> </oslc:QueryResult> >> >> </rdf:RDF> >> >> I'd like to discuss this during tomorrow's core WG call to see if >> this could be incorporated into the query result representation > guidance. >> >> [1] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecQuery? >> sortcol=table;up=#Member_List_Patterns >> >> Thanks, >> Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645 > >> >> Patrick Streule <[email protected]> wrote on 08/03/2010 > 12:38:36 PM: >> >> > From: Patrick Streule <[email protected]> >> > To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS >> > Cc: [email protected] >> > Date: 08/03/2010 12:44 PM >> > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposed change to JSON formatting rules >> > for Query responses >> > >> > > I would expect with our approach to resource formats now, we could > simply >> > >> > > represent the query response as: >> > > >> > > ... >> > > >> > > Thus eliminating the intermediate query resource and property, just >> > > include the resources in the response. >> > >> > That would be even simpler, but I think it interferes with the > Resource >> > Pagination part of the core spec. >> > Having a 'QueryResult' resource with 'result' properties makes query >> > results just a specific case of Resource Pagination (the properties -- > all >> > the same in this case -- are continued on additional pages). >> > >> > There would be a corner case (a bit constructed, admittedly): If the > page >> > size is 1, a client couldn't tell if the representation means that the >> > properties of the single resource are continued on additional pages, > or if >> > there are additional resources on these pages: >> > >> > <rdf:RDF >> > xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"; >> > xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"; >> > xmlns:oslc="http://open-services.net/ns/core#"; >> > xmlns:oslc_blog="http://open-services.net/ns/bogus/blogs#";> >> > >> > <oslc:ResponseInfo rdf:about="http://example.com/query?oslc.from > [...] >> > entry/1>"> >> > <dcterms:title>Blog Service Query Results for term >> > [remote]</dcterms:title> >> > <oslc:nextPage rdf:resource="..."/> >> > </oslc:ResponseInfo> >> > >> > <oslc_blog:Comment rdf:about="http://example.com/blogs/comment/5";> >> > <!-- Comment propery values, etc. --> >> > <dcterms:title>Comment #5</dcterms:title> >> > </oslc_blog:Comment> >> > >> > </rdf:RDF> >> > >> > This representation could mean >> > 1) There are more properties of oslc_blog:Comment on the next page >> > 2) There are more oslc_blog:Comment resources on the next page >> > >> > Regards, >> > Patrick >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > > Some concerns that I have: >> > > > >> > > > 1) Wouldn't these resources/properties also have to be spec'd by > the >> > > > domains? I.e. the CM spec would have to define e.g. a >> > > > 'oslc_cm:ChangeRequestQueryResult' resource. Currently, I don't > see >> > > > anything about query results e.g. in the CM, QM and RM specs. >> > > >> > > I have an outstanding action to add definition of this for > "oslc:results" >> > >> > > for JSON query results. >> > > I made an assumption about the RDF/XML and XML form (as illustrated >> > above) >> > > that I need to get clarification on, where I thought we didn't need > to >> > > define query resources for the response. >> > > >> > > > 2) Does a domain specific query result resource provide added > value >> > over >> > > a >> > > > generic 'oslc:QueryResult' resource with 'oslc:results' > properties? I >> > > see >> > > > that we get "Type Safety" by the domain specific > resources/properties, >> > > but >> > > > the convenience of a common format for query results seems to > outweigh >> > > > that, IMO. >> > > > >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > Patrick >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > From: Steve K Speicher <[email protected]> >> > > > >> > > > To: [email protected] >> > > > >> > > > Date: 07/27/2010 10:57 PM >> > > > >> > > > Subject: [oslc-core] Proposed change to JSON formatting rules >> > > > for Query responses >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Current JSON guidance [1] doesn't address what the result array > name >> > > > should be. >> > > > >> > > > I recommend that we use "oslc:results" array, like for delegated > UIs >> > [2] >> > > > >> > > > See also example at [3], how does a consumer know to look for > array >> > > named >> > > > "oslc_blog:comment" in this example. I think it would be best to > use a >> > > > general OSLC property. >> > > > So this example would become: >> > > > "oslc:results" : [{ >> > > > "oslc:qname" : "oslc_blog:BlogComment", >> > > > "rdf:resource" : "http://example.com/blogs/comment/346";, >> > > > }, >> > > > >> > > > [1] >> > > > http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/ >> > > > OSLCCoreRepresentationsGuidance#Guidelines_for_JSON >> > > > >> > > > [2] >> > > > http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/ >> > > > OslcCoreSpecification#Delegated_User_Interface_Dialogs >> > > > >> > > > [3] >> > > > >> > > >> > > http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecAppendixD#Query_Resource > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > 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 >
