Ed, Thanks for coming back to version 0…. Indeed this is what we should focus on and we rather call it version 1. As I mentioned in my other note, IMO for Opt-out we shouldnot recommend link

Hi David, all, Again, pulling back towards the pragmatic principle “let’s define a profile that at least guarantees ELM (jazz) cross linking”. Let’s push to the background for now

Sorry I’ve missed the discussion today. It’s a holiday here. One thing for me is very clear. If by link we mean a single predicate then we always know where it is stored. Always. It is stored

OASIS Members and other interested parties, OASIS is pleased to announce the publication of five new Project Notes from the members of the OASIS Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration (OSLC) OP

I am specifically not proposing to store backlinks. What I’m suggesting is that which link is the forward link depends on the use case the servers are trying to support. So rather I’m proposing

I'm always for only storing the forward link. It has a clear advantage in the ability to better manage the configurations and the composition of configurations. If I could get rid of backlinks I

Always trying to create both forward and back links seems like the wrong thing to do, even in opt-out mode. Servers are free to either silently ignore RDF properties it doesn’t support, or to fail

Indeed I agree that this is a good start to the discussion. But as Jim identifies here we have some variability in the definition of where the link storage and inverse are stored. If we go on the

This is a good start, but we should understand how it supports the use cases and common practice. On the issues we’ve been discussing on links: the OSLC specifications define vocabularies and

Thanks Andrii -- Michael Rowe STSM & MBA – Technical Strategist, ELM Architecture IBM Engineering +1(720)342-2713 Office michael.rowe@... @michaelrowe01 ibm.co/elm Sustainable Software

Hi, I put together a simple table for the possible profiles after the call:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fjjGvHrv2yPru8S_6HNoJ5atn6617cUfFUDRz5xAfKQ/edit?usp=sharing Please look at

Had a great meeting today, welcoming Michael Rowe and having a deep dive intoLinking profiles: see https://github.com/oslc-op/oasis-open-project/blob/master/minutes/2022/2022-05-26.md for the MoM.

oslc-op Weekly Contributors Meeting When: 05/26/2022 10:00am to 11:00am (UTC-04:00) America/New York Where: https://meet.jit.si/oslc-op Organizer: Jim Amsden jamsden@... View

Participants of the OSLC Open Project, A Special Majority Vote to consider OSLC Configuration Management Version 1.0 as a Project Specification has been set up. The ballot opens on 24 May 2022 at

This request has opened ticket https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/TCADMIN-4194 to set up your ballot. Sending this to you since for some reason email from JIRA is not making it through right now.

Your name:

Hello, I don't see a Request for an SMV under https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/TCADMIN-4149?jql=project+%3D+TCADMIN+AND+text+%7E+%22oslc%22+AND+text+%7E+%22majority%22+ORDER+BY+createdDate++DESC

Minutes from the today's meeting can be found under https://github.com/oslc-op/oasis-open-project/blob/master/minutes/2022/2022-05-19.md /Andrew

oslc-op Weekly Contributors Meeting When: 05/19/2022 10:00am to 11:00am (UTC-04:00) America/New York Where: https://meet.jit.si/oslc-op Organizer: Jim Amsden jamsden@... View

OASIS members and other interested parties, OASIS and the OASIS OSLC Lifecycle Integration for Project Management of Contracted Delivery (OSLC PROMCODE) TC are pleased to announce that OSLC PROMCODE