Steve,

My reply is [1]. I think I disagree with you.

For Example 2, the occurence constraint is one or many. Therefore zero is
NOT allowed.

For Example 3, Either means that both representations are valid, i.e. the
resource is "inlined" or just references via URI. Both client and server
must be able to handle both representations.

[1]
http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/2012-April/001299.html

Regards,
___________________________________________________________________________

 Arthur Ryman

 DE, Chief Architect, Reporting &

 Portfolio Strategy and Management

 IBM Software, Rational

 Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) |
 +1-416-939-5063 (mobile)





|------------>
| From:      |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS                                           
                                                                     |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| To:        |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |Arthur Ryman <[email protected]>                                              
                                                                     |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Cc:        |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |[email protected]                                                  
                                                                     |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Date:      |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |04/20/2012 11:23 AM                                                          
                                                                     |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Subject:   |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |Re: [oslc-core] Fw: what is the actual intent of resource    definition      
table   columns?                                                            |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|





Perhaps its best to look at it in the archive:
http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/2012-April/001292.html


I only was trying to capture the intent as stated.

Arthur Ryman <[email protected]> wrote on 04/20/2012 11:18:56 AM:

> From: Arthur Ryman <[email protected]>
> To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS,
> Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
> Date: 04/20/2012 11:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Fw: what is the actual intent of resource
> definition table columns?
>
> Steve,
>
> I replied in a separate note. The attached note is very hard to parse.
If
> you'd like a vote, could you summarize your assessment? Thx.
>
> Regards,
>
___________________________________________________________________________


>
> Arthur Ryman


Reply via email to