Meetings/Telecon2018.01.11

Event details

• Calendar entry: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/oslc-core/event.php?event_id=45965

• Call-in info: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/oslc-core/members/action_item.php?action_item_id=3688 (access restricted to OASIS members)

• Chat room: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/oslc

• Issue list: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/oslccore

• Scribes: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/Meetings/Scribes

Agenda

1. Scribe nomination
2. Roll Call

3. Approval of Dec 14 minutes

4. Next meeting Jan 18, 2018

5. Actions from the previous meeting
   • Martin to fix some references and introductory paragraphs for TRS and CCM - still on list
   • Nick to set up subcommittee meetings to discuss skew resolution, TRS spec
   • Axel to commence editing on TRS spec
   • Martin to change Axel to editor on home page (done)
6. Topics
   • Proposal from Jim Amsden: OSLC Core should specify MUST for RDF, SHOULD support all standard RDF serialization formats, and SHOULD support RDF/XML for backward compatibility with OSLC 2.0, SHOULD support Turtle for LDP compatibility
   • Updates from all document editors
7. Other business

Voting Rights

Held by:

• Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH)
• David Honey (IBM)
• Harish Krishnaswamy (Software AG)
• Jad El-Khoury (KTH)
• Jim Amsden (IBM)
• Martin Sarabura (PTC)
• Nick Crossley (IBM)
• Ian Green (IBM)

Minutes

Chair

• Martin Sarabura (PTC)

Scribe

• Nick Crossley (IBM)

Attendees

• Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH)
• David Honey (IBM)
• Harish Krishnaswamy (Software AG)
• Jad El-Khoury (KTH)
• Jim Amsden (IBM)
• Martin Sarabura (PTC)
• Nick Crossley (IBM)

Regrets

Resolutions

Actions

• Martin to fix some references and introductory paragraphs for TRS and CCM - still on list
• Nick to set up subcommittee meetings to discuss skew resolution and search order

Chat transcript from room: oslc

[15:04] Martin Sarabura (PTC): https://wiki.oasis-open.org/oslc-core/Meetings/Telecon2017.12.14

[15:06] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick noted that the previous minutes had an action item for Nick to arrange follow-up TRS meetings; in fact, Axel had volunteered to take this on.

[15:07] Nick Crossley (IBM): Other than this, no objections to minutes noted - minutes are accepted

[15:07] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin: we need to set up those TRS meetings - Axel has not been in meetings recently

[15:08] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick to set up meeting on Config Mgmt search order/skew resolution issue

[15:09] Nick Crossley (IBM): Martin: topic from previous meeting:

[15:09] Martin Sarabura (PTC): Proposal from Jim: OSLC Core should specify MUST for RDF, SHOULD support all standard RDF serialization formats, and SHOULD support RDF/XML for backward compatibility with OSLC 2.0, SHOULD support Turtle for LDP compatibility

[15:10] Nick Crossley (IBM): Andrew wondered why we did not vote on this in previous meeting - Martin/Jim responded that we just ran out of time

[15:11] Nick Crossley (IBM): 3.0 spec today says MUST for Turtle and JSON-LD (taken from LDP spec)

[15:11] Jim Amsden: Specific proposal:

[15:11] Jim Amsden: 4.4.1 OSLC Services must provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource.

[15:11] Jim Amsden: Change to:

[15:12] Nick Crossley (IBM): 2.0 spec required RDF/XML, and had SHOULD for some others

[15:12] Jim Amsden: 4.4.1 OSLC Services MUST support some RDF resource serialization format. provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource.

[15:12] Jim Amsden: 4.4.2 4.4.1 OSLC Services MAY provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource.

[15:13] Jim Amsden: 4.4.1 OSLC Services MUST support some RDF resource serialization format.

[15:13] Jim Amsden: 4.4.2 OSLC Services SHOULD provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource.

[15:14] Jim Amsden: 4.4.3 OSLC Services SHOULD provide and accept RDF/XML representations for each OSLC resource, especially to support compatibility with OSLC 2.0

[15:14] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim & David - discuss the strength of SHOULD vs. MAY

[15:17] Jim Amsden: 4.4.2 OSLC Services MAY provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource.

[15:24] Nick Crossley (IBM): Andrew believes the standard should say SHOULD or MUST for RDF/XML for compatibility, and strongly encourage developers to support all RDF serialization formats currently available in the library or framework being used.

[15:25] Nick Crossley (IBM): I'm back

[15:27] Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): For the record, I suggest SHOULD for rdf/xml and SHOULD for supporting as many formats as possible through content neg

[15:27] Nick Crossley (IBM): Nick suggested Jim write up 2-3 alternative wordings to encompass what has been discussed on RDF serialization, and we discuss/vote next meeting.

[15:29] Jim Amsden: 4.4.1 OSLC Services MUST support some RDF resource serialization format, and SHOULD support as many serialization formats through content negotiation. 4.4.2 OSLC Services SHOULD provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource for compatibility with LDP 1.0. 4.4.3 OSLC Services SHOULD provide and accept RDF/XML representations for each OSLC resource for compatibility with OSLC 2.0

[15:32] Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): From RDF 1.1: An RDF document is a document that encodes an RDF graph or RDF dataset in a concrete RDF syntax, such as Turtle [TURTLE], RDFa [RDFA-PRIMER], JSON-LD [JSON-LD], or TriG [TRIG]. RDF documents enable the exchange of RDF graphs and RDF datasets between systems.

[15:32] Nick Crossley (IBM): Jim will also update the Core issue on this topic

[15:32] Nick Crossley (IBM): Meeting adjourned