Event details


  1. Roll Call
  2. Scribe nomination
  3. Review minutes of previous meeting
  4. Core topics
  5. Configuration Management topics
  6. Any other business
  7. Adjourn


Chat transcript from room: oslc-ccm 2015-10-08 GMT-08:00

[07:07] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Martin volunteers to be scribe

[07:07] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Attendance: Brian Steele (IBM) David Honey (IBM) Jim Amsden (IBM) Martin Sarabura (PTC) Nick Crossley (IBM)

[07:07] Nick Crossley (IBM): Brian - see you in the chat window, but not on the phone call?

[07:08] Brian Steele (IBM): Previous call running long, will join in 1 min

[07:08] Nick Crossley (IBM): Previous meeting minutes at

[07:09] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Minutes accepted

Topic: Core update

[07:10] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Merged vocabularies into a common vocabulary document - called core vocabulary

[07:11] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Some additional merging questions

[07:13] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Some resource shapes had oslc:name property - but not in original spec

[07:14] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Should that have been dcterms:title?

[07:15] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: May be covered by existing properties

[07:16] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Just going off oslc v2 core spec

[07:17] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Committing to branch but something has been changed? Need to pull from branch - from directory not just files

[07:17] Martin Sarabura (PTC): From parent directory

[07:18] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: Can we do a force commit?

[07:18] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: There were some unresolved conflicts - seeing a diff indicating conflict

[07:20] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Topic for core next week: issue around shape uris

[07:20] Martin Sarabura (PTC): oslc v2 assumed that tools would just produce shapes - nobody had specified how to do shapes in core

[07:21] Martin Sarabura (PTC): issue 25

[07:21] Martin Sarabura (PTC): from core

Next topic: ReSpec

[07:22] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Issues with browser compatibility

[07:23] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Needed changes to fix citation block

[07:23] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Found two errors which caused it to break in some browsers, some minor formatting issues

[07:24] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Submitted request to Steve Speicher, no response yet

[07:25] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Chet said he would handle some of that for us? Manually, not through respec

[07:26] Martin Sarabura (PTC): If published doc respec has problems - seems to be fragile - is it good enough to publish a pdf instead?

[07:27] Martin Sarabura (PTC): The doc we work on is completely different from what is actually published

[07:28] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Don't want subsequent editors to work on published document as starting point

[07:28] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Need to talk to Chet. If they are not willing/able to take on ReSpec then the TCs may have to.

[07:29] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: OASIS likely willing to host ReSpec but not necessarily technical ownership

[07:29] Martin Sarabura (PTC): If other TCs want to use it then it makes sense for them to take ownership

[07:30] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Can they manage repository and allow contributors to make their own contributions

[07:32] Martin Sarabura (PTC): David: Need a way to save the DOM - which could have browser incompatibilities

[07:32] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: Javascript more likely the problem than the html

[07:34] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Generating HTML probably difficult and would probably not fix the incompatibility issues. Only generated form we could create is pdf

[07:34] David Honey (IBM):

[07:34] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Respec is the published document, or pdf

[07:35] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Martin: pdf doesn't play nice with search engines

[07:36] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: stackoverflow recommendation may not solve the problem

[07:37] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Only thing we see breaking is the generated shape tables

[07:38] Martin Sarabura (PTC): W3C had no equivalent code - based on xslt code that Nick had written with Arthur Ryman

[07:40] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: I am the de-facto owner of the oasis-specific respec code

[07:40] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Unlikely oasis will want to take technical ownership

[07:41] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: OK with it being an open source project, may be best solution for oasis

[07:42] Martin Sarabura (PTC): David: Need to encourage participants to commit resources to do it

[07:42] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Steve's ReSpec is a clone of the w3c respec

[07:43] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick's is a clone of Steve's

[07:44] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: Raised some issues previously: Committee note on business case, could be motivation section of intro doc

Next topic: Additional work products for ccm spec

[07:45] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Related to another topic: More info on use cases

[07:46] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Business cases on may be out of date and perhaps incomplete

[07:46] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: Also some use cases from Interconnect

[07:46] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Don't really describe the user's interaction with the system - so not really use cases

[07:47] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Should udpate overall plan with expected deliverables

[07:47] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: Should they be in committee note, or wiki, or both?

[07:48] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: We are doing a primer anyway - maybe combined with motivation section - would be enough

[07:49] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Not against committee note, just need a bit more clarity on plan

[07:49] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: Volunteer to come up with a draft motivation section of overview, also clone use cases from and bring in Interconnect material

[07:50] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: OK, need a vote since this a new contribution

[07:50] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: Interconnect ideas recasted, not brought in verbatim

[07:52] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Jim: No restrictions (other than copyright) on wiki material?

[07:53] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Formal vote to accept use cases for cm as a contribution

[07:53] Martin Sarabura (PTC): All voting members on the call

[07:53] David Honey (IBM): +1

[07:53] Martin Sarabura (PTC): +1

[07:53] Nick Crossley (IBM): +1

[07:53] Brian Steele (IBM): +1

[07:54] Jim Amsden (IBM): +1

[07:54] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Accepted

Next topic: Question to PTC: Review changes from previous minutes?

[07:56] Martin Sarabura (PTC): treatment of nested components

[07:58] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Components may be hierarchical, but spec has no opinion on semantics of the hierarchy. Defines hierarchy of configurations

[07:59] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Avoid confusion in semantics if you had two different types of hierarchies

[08:01] Martin Sarabura (PTC): This version of spec doesn't want to say how to specify versions of configurations

[08:01] Martin Sarabura (PTC): LDPCs do define structure

[08:02] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Leave door open to future definitions of structures - they could exist, nothing stopping tool from having additional properties

[08:03] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Martin: Acceptable to PTC

[08:03] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Any other business?

[08:03] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Meeting adjourned

Action Items

[07:55] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Nick: Action item to review schedule in light of current progress, respec, these new work products

[07:55] Martin Sarabura (PTC): and publish update

Meetings/Telecon2015.10.08 (last edited 2015-11-04 16:50:01 by ndjc)