There is an OMG effort to define the SysML v2 API which mentions OSLC. I'm nota familiar with the API4KB working group. I'm familiar with ISO_15926. It is used a lot in Norway in combination with

Hi, Is this the OMG effort to define APIs? Because OSLC is not even in the list of references there. Also, did anyone hear about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15926? -- –Andrew.

Hi I will be on holidays until mid-august so will have limited time to attend the telcos. But I hope I can find time to respond to actions via email. regards ______________________________ Jad

Hi, After the call with Chet, Jim, and Nick today I tried my chances with JS by editing ReSpec and tried the results out on the RM spec (sorry Jad :D). Please find attached two rendered specs for the

I agree - but I amout on vacation from now until Tuesday July 16th. I cannot see itas desirable for the 'authoritative' link that readers will use to readthe current standard appear as the

Let’s set up a meeting! -- /Andrew (from phone) On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 6:52 PM +0200, "Jim Amsden" <jamsden@...> wrote:

We discussed usingThis version: https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs/blob/cm-v3.0-psd01/specs/cm/change-mgt-spec.html(Authoritative) with Chet and he feels it is preferred that the

I agree with Andrew. We cannot usethe URIs Jim suggests for the authoritative 'this' version - https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs/blob/cm-v3.0-psd01/specs/cm/change-mgt-spec.html- it does not even

Jim, The idea is actually the other way around: that the open-services URLs will appear in the spec and our redirects will point to the locations of OASIS choosing (for the spec editions published

OK - but rememberthat I have uncommitted changes to TRS, so try not to make too many parallelchanges there! Nick. From: AndriiBerezovskyi <andriib@...> To: NicholasCrossley

Thanks Nick! I will try your updates on the TRS spec draft. -- /Andrew (from phone) 3 juli 2019 kl. 01:01 skrev Nicholas Crossley <nick_crossley@...>:

I agree that it should be a good effort but I think Jim was referring to the amount of effort he already spent with Gatsby onhttps://oslc.github.io/developing-oslc-applications/😊

It would be hardto justify the resource to migrate the current OSLC Developer Guide materialin any way. If we can utilize docsy for new stuff without breaking theold, then that's fine. -- Jim Amsden,

Thanks Jory! Gabriel, what do you think about incorporating this on open services? Jim, Jad, if it’s not feasible to incorporate on the main site, we can use it for the devguide, which I suggested

Jim, Alex, Andrew et al, Came across this new set of templates for Hugo Google has in beta and I thought it might be interesting to ya'll: https://github.com/google/docsy - Jory

I have created aproposal here: https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/issues/19.Please provide comments. -- Jim Amsden, SeniorTechnical Staff Member ELM Quality Manager 919-525-6575

Very cool! Thanks Andrew!

Very much appreciated, Chet! Have a nice weekend! -- /Andrew (from phone) On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 8:03 PM +0200, "Chet Ensign" <chet.ensign@...> wrote:

Slowly but surely, I am getting oriented to where we are and catching up... The OP rules do not require that so yes, that is fine. Correct. And approving it as PSD04 is fine. Right, no approval

Whoops. Thanks for that catch. We add that file briefly while we are QA'ing files after copying them from our staging server. We remove it before announcing the publication to everyone. Looks like we