Re: Conflict tomorrow
|
Robert Baillargeon
Agree that it is a companion. It is the inverse of having consistent behavior when managing tools that meet these profile capabilities. It is simply imperative that this is part of the value proposition that if a providing repository meets profile X, then
the consumer behaves in a known pattern.
Robert
Chief Product Officer – Linked Data 418 N. Main Street 2nd Floor/Suite 200, Royal
Oak, Michigan 48067, USA
Try out our Jira and Confluence OSLC Tools on the Atlassian Marketplace From: Eran Gery <eran.gery@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 3:49 AM To: Robert Baillargeon <rbaillargeon@...> Cc: oslc-op@... <oslc-op@...> Subject: RE: Conflict tomorrow Hi Robert
The profiles do not focus on ELM, but where there are choices to be made (mostly around link storage) we align with ELM choices as they are also most widely known. Also, ELM is currently the only system that natively implements global config, while others are at best currently mapped to it via connectors – so obviously it is the low hanging reference for global config related conventions. Other than that, all the other profile guidelines are generic and driven from the need to support the use case.
I agree that we need to add failure handling to the guidelines based on the experience gained. I expect you to add the right text once we decide on how to write the guidelines for each profile.
Thanks Eran
From: Robert Baillargeon <rbaillargeon@...>
I, too, unfortunately, have a conflict tomorrow. As this is focused on ELM as the dominant case, I would suggest identifying a critical integration point to add to the profile for consumers. As we look at discovery scenarios, we need to eliminate ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd I, too, unfortunately, have a conflict tomorrow.
As this is focused on ELM as the dominant case, I would suggest identifying a critical integration point to add to the profile for consumers.
As we look at discovery scenarios, we need to eliminate the issue of silent failures. This is common in integrations with the AM profile but also in other scenarios. Effectively we see scenarios where an OSLC query fails due to a slow response or lack of authentication (direct or downstream GC authentication) that doesn't notify users. Users interpret this as an issue with the providing data source rather than the consuming repository. I believe we should have requirements that discoveries should not fail silently and notify or prompt the user to identify information that may be missing and with the cause.
This concretely happens in DNG configuration managed with AM links external to ELM family. Forcing an OAuth cycle (by a "create a link" dialog) will allow existing links to present themselves magically.
Robert
Chief Product Officer – Linked Data 418 N. Main Street 2nd Floor/Suite 200, Royal Oak, Michigan 48067, USA
Try out our Jira and Confluence OSLC Tools on the Atlassian Marketplace From:
oslc-op@... <oslc-op@...> on behalf of "Eran Gery" via lists.oasis-open-projects.org <eran.gery=il.ibm.com@...>
Hi All
I have a conflict tomorrow.. I sent out a draft document for the linking profiles intent and requirements… please send me comments/feedback by email
Thanks,
Eran Gery – Global Industry Solutions Lead, IBM ELM
|
||||
|
|
