Throughout the development of specs within the RM WG and various other OSLC domain WGs we've been in discussion on ways to best handle links, for example modeling them from an outbound perspective of the current resource. Time and experience has shown that this introduces statements which are redundant, such as (ChangeRequest1, oslc_cm:implementsRequirement, Requirement1) which is exactly the same as saying: (Requirement1, oslc_rm:implementedBy, ChangeRequest1).
This causes various problems around data duplication and ease of writing queries. This motivation and best practices has been captured in Core WG Link Guidance [1]. For the full list of RM (and other) predicates that are considered redundant and the recommended predicates, see the full listing at [2]. For ease, here is the list of RM predicates proposed for consideration of deprecation: trackedBy implementedBy affectedBy validatedBy elaborates specifies satisfies decomposes constrains [1] - http://open-services.net/wiki/core/Links/ [2] - http://open-services.net/wiki/core/V2DuplicatePredicates/ Thanks, Steve Speicher IBM Rational Software OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net
