Errata in OSLC Quality Management Specification Version 2.1 OASIS Standard 19 January 2022
Chet Ensign
Sounds good to me. We can go with that. /chet On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 4:07 PM Paul Knight <paul.knight@...> wrote:
--
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Paul Knight
Hi all, Here are my initial comments, subject to Chet's review: I would suggest something like a "README" text file included in the publication directory, to note that line 240 of this file has been corrected, and now differs from the file approved by the membership of OASIS during the "Call for Consent". (i.e., the file at https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/oslc-op/qm/v2.1/ps01/quality-management-shapes.ttl) We could also include similar language in the announcement of the publication of the OS. Best regards, Paul On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 2:44 PM Jim Amsden <jamsden@...> wrote:
--
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chet, We discovered a copy/paste mistake in one of the above specification’s additional components files. File quality-management-shapes.ttl contains:
:TestResultShape a oslc:ResourceShape ; oslc:describes oslc_qm:TestResult ; oslc:property [ a oslc:Property ; oslc:allowedValue "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.failed" , "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.inconclusive" , "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.passed" , "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.deferred" , "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.incomplete" , "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.blocked" , "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.part_blocked" , "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.perm_failed" , "com.ibm.rqm.execution.common.state.error" ; oslc:hidden false ; oslc:isMemberProperty false ; oslc:name "status" ; oslc:occurs oslc:Zero-or-one ; oslc:propertyDefinition oslc_qm:status ; oslc:readOnly false ; oslc:valueType xsd:string ; dcterms:description "Used to indicate the state of the Test Result based on values defined by the service provider. Most often a read-only property." ; dcterms:title "Status" , "Status"@en ] ;
Ths should be:
:TestResultShape a oslc:ResourceShape ; oslc:describes oslc_qm:TestResult ; oslc:property [ a oslc:Property ; oslc:hidden false ; oslc:isMemberProperty false ; oslc:name "status" ; oslc:occurs oslc:Zero-or-one ; oslc:propertyDefinition oslc_qm:status ; oslc:readOnly false ; oslc:valueType xsd:string ; dcterms:description "Used to indicate the state of the Test Result based on values defined by the service provider. Most often a read-only property." ; dcterms:title "Status" , "Status"@en ] ;
The oslc:allowedValues contained content copied from the IBM implementation that should have been removed. This was editing oversight that does not result in any changes to any of the other published specification parts.
Note that the Turtle file, quality-management-shapes.ttl is the normative content which the normative sections in the specification generated from this file. The oslc:allowedValues is not included in any of these ReSpec rendered documents.
How should we go about following an errata process to update quality-management-shapes.ttl and remove the oslc:allowedValues?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|