OSLC Lifecycle Integration for Project Mgmt of Contracted Delivery (PROMCODE) TC

Arthur, Thank you for sharing your experience. It helps a lot. I didn't know oslc:representation property since they are not shown in shape table which are generated by ReSpec. All members, I will update shape document on Friday, unless you have any comment on it. The changes would be: - add oslc:representation property to links - set them as oslc:Reference except > promcode:target (from Artifact to Target) promcode:determines (from Target to Measure) promcode:observes (from Measurement to Measure). - for these links, set them as oslc:Inline Regards, Kaz

Members, During updating resource shape, I found that defineFor:Target ? Artifact seems no use. This relation does not appear in fig.6 but fig.3. Originally, Target was an independent resource type (or LocalResource), but now inline. < http://example.com/promcode/item/42 > a oslc_promcode:Artifact; oslc:target < http://example.com/promcode/item/42#target-3 >. < http://example.com/promcode/item/42#target-3 > a oslc_promcode:Target; oslc:definedFor < http://example.com/promcode/item/42 >. Since they have same lifecycle, the definedFor range of <x#targe-y> always points to <x>. However, it seems not making something bad though. Any ideas? Regards, Kaz Attachment: smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Kaz, Yes, I agree with you that oslc_promcode:definedFor is redundant since if we are give the URI of a Target resource then we can find the URI of the Artifact via oslc_promcode:target. These are inverse properties so only one is needed from a vocabulary point of view. Furthermore, Target resources are always inlined in the Artifact resource. I recommend that we eliminate oslc_promcode:definedFor. -- Arthur On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:02 PM, Kazuhiro Funakoshi <k-f@bk.jp.nec.com> wrote: > Members, > > During updating resource shape, I found that defineFor:Target ? Artifact seems no use. > This relation does not appear in fig.6 but fig.3. > Originally, Target was an independent resource type (or LocalResource), but now inline. > > < http://example.com/promcode/item/42 > a oslc_promcode:Artifact; > oslc:target < http://example.com/promcode/item/42#target-3 >. > < http://example.com/promcode/item/42#target-3 > a oslc_promcode:Target; > oslc:definedFor < http://example.com/promcode/item/42 >. > > Since they have same lifecycle, the definedFor range of <x#targe-y> always points to <x>. > > However, it seems not making something bad though. Any ideas? > > Regards, > Kaz >