Event details


  1. Scribe nomination
  2. Roll Call
  3. Approval of May 31 minutes

  4. Next meeting June 14, 2018

  5. Actions from the previous meeting
    • Martin to request full majority vote as resolved above
    • Martin to request publication of the CSD to the OASIS repository
    • Martin to set up meeting to discuss Query spec on June 14
  6. Topics
    • TBD
  7. Other business

Voting Rights

Held by:







Chat transcript from room: oslc

[10:04] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): David is scribe.
[10:04] Martin Sarabura:
[10:04] Martin Sarabura:
[10:04] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Minutes accepted.
[10:06] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Public Review for OSLC Core V3.0 has been announced.
[10:11] Martin Sarabura: David?
[10:12] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): OASIS technical advisory board has advised that conformance statements are missing from the specs.
[10:13] Jim Amsden: The requirement is documented in paragraph 2.2.6 of
[10:13] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Conformance statements need to be separated in the spec.
[10:13] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Document says:
2.2.6 Conformance Clauses. A Standards Track Work Product that is approved by the TC at the Committee Specification Public Review Draft, Committee Specification or OASIS Standard level must include a separate section, listing a set of numbered conformance clauses, to which any implementation of the specification must adhere in order to claim conformance to the specification (or any optional portion thereof).
[10:15] Jim Amsden: <section id="discOptions"><h2 class="normalText"> Clients SHOULD use HTTP <code>OPTIONS</code> to fetch various headers and other configuration information that may be exposed in the response content body from other HTTP methods. </h2></section>
[10:18] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Jim sent note regarding convention we use in OSLC, some of which are already approved and published.
[10:20] Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH):
[10:21] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Should conformance numbers be preserved when new sections or normative statements are added?
[10:24] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): W3C uses section numbers in conformance numbers.
[10:25] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Example from MQTT: [MQTT-1.5.4-1]
[10:28] Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH):
[10:30] Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): see 4.3 in the handbook
[10:33] Jim Amsden: A Shared Subscription's Topic Filter MUST start with $share/ and MUST contain a ShareName that is at least one character long [MQTT-4.8.2-1]. The ShareName MUST NOT contain the characters "/", "+" or "#", but MUST be followed by a "/" character. This "/" character MUST be followed by a Topic Filter [MQTT-4.8.2-2] as described in section 4.7.
[10:34] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): We could use a class in an HTML element to denote a conformance. Respec can then allocate the number and include the conformance number reference in the HTML, and generate the appendix of conformance numbers and the text within the element.
[10:35] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Ideally the table/list of conformance would use a link for the conformance to allow a user to navigate to it in the normativbe body of the spec.
[10:39] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Needs discussion with Chat.
[10:46] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Meeting cadence. Jim suggestion - keep core meeting short, say 30 minutes. Schedule bi-weekly meetings for core subtopics (TRS, query, Config Mgmt).
[10:50] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Andrew - meetings of 30 minutes curtails details and makes agenda shallow.
[10:51] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Domains - cadence? 30 minutes per week after core?
[10:53] David Honey (Persistent/IBM): Meeting adjourned.

Meetings/Telecon2018.06.07 (last edited 2018-06-20 14:37:39 by sarabura)