Arthur, I considered this but with the format limitations of JSON the same paradigm doesn't fit as well.
In addition, the usage of oslc:results is in place in a couple implementations and don't see a strong argument where usage of "rdfs:member" will add much value at this point. So I recommend that we just caulk it up to be a different of the formats. Thanks, Steve Arthur Ryman <[email protected]> wrote on 08/04/2010 02:09:58 PM: > From: Arthur Ryman <[email protected]> > To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Date: 08/04/2010 02:10 PM > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposed change to JSON formatting rules > for Query responses > > Steve, > > This looks good. Thx. > > One question though. You wrote: > > 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 > > Why wouldn't we use the same name everywhere? rWouldn't it get confusing > to use different names? dfs:member just a prefixed name that happens to be > in the RDFS namespace. This just means adding a prefix def for rdfs: in > the JSON object. > > 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 > > > > > > > > From: > Steve K Speicher <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > Date: > 08/04/2010 01:49 PM > Subject: > Re: [oslc-core] Proposed change to JSON formatting rules for Query > responses > Sent by: > [email protected] > > > > 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 > > >
