Setup redirects for old OSLC specification wikis

Question

Setup redirects for old OSLC specification wikis

jamsden opened this issue 6 years ago · 19 comments

Many people have saved links to the old open-services.net specification wikis, and they are surprised when these links return 404. There is a button on the error page that takes the user to corresponding page in the archive. However, each of the specifications should have direct redirects to the specification wikis. For example, the OSLC Core 2.0 specification should redirect https://open-services.net/specifications/core-2.0/index.html to https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/core-2.0/index.html.

Answer 1 · 2019-01-14T16:53:19.000Z

	Domain	Specification
Core	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/core-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreSpecification.html
Resource Shape	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/resource-shapes-2.0/index.html
OSLC Query
Tracked Resource Set	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/tracked-resource-set-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/core/TrackedResourceSet-2.0/index.html
Configuration Management	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/configuration-management/index.html
Requirements Management	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/requirements-management-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/bin/view/Main/RmSpecificationV2.html
Change Management	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/change-management-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2.html
Quality Management	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/quality-management-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/quality-management/index.html
Architecture Management	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/architecture-management-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/architecture-management/OSLC-Architecture-Management-Specification-Version-2.0/index.html
Asset Management	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/asset-management-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/asset-management/OSLC-Asset-Management-2.0-Specification/index.html
Automation	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/automation-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/automation/OSLC-Automation-Specification-Version-2.0/index.html
Performance Modeling	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/performance-monitoring-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/performance-monitoring/OSLC-Performance-Monitoring-Specification-Version-2.0/index.html
Estimation and Measurement	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/estimation-and-measurement-20/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/estimation-and-measurement/Estimation-and-Measurement-Service-Version-1.0_-REST-API/index.html
Reconciliation	https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/reconciliation-2.0/index.html	https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/reconciliation/OSLC-Reconciliation-Specification-Version-2.0/index.html

Answer 2 · 2019-01-14T17:28:14.000Z

See also https://www-01preview.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSYMRC_6.0.6.1/com.ibm.rational.test.qm.doc/topics/r_oslc_services.html, these links should be included.

Answer 3 · 2019-01-22T02:33:01.000Z

Domain Specification
Core https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/core-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreSpecification.html
Resource Shape https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/resource-shapes-2.0/index.html
OSLC Query
Tracked Resource Set https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/tracked-resource-set-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/core/TrackedResourceSet-2.0/index.html
Configuration Management https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/configuration-management/index.html
Requirements Management https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/requirements-management-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/bin/view/Main/RmSpecificationV2.html
Change Management https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/change-management-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2.html
Quality Management https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/quality-management-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/quality-management/index.html
Architecture Management https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/architecture-management-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/architecture-management/OSLC-Architecture-Management-Specification-Version-2.0/index.html
Asset Management https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/asset-management-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/asset-management/OSLC-Asset-Management-2.0-Specification/index.html
Automation https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/automation-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/automation/OSLC-Automation-Specification-Version-2.0/index.html
Performance Modeling https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/performance-monitoring-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/performance-monitoring/OSLC-Performance-Monitoring-Specification-Version-2.0/index.html
Estimation and Measurement https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/estimation-and-measurement-20/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/estimation-and-measurement/Estimation-and-Measurement-Service-Version-1.0_-REST-API/index.html
Reconciliation https://archive.open-services.net/specifications/reconciliation-2.0/index.html https://archive.open-services.net/wiki/reconciliation/OSLC-Reconciliation-Specification-Version-2.0/index.html

Just created and tested the redirects mentioned in this table, can anyone test it to see if everything is correct?

Answer 4 · 2019-01-22T15:37:16.000Z

For QM spec: https://open-services.net/wiki/quality-management/index.html should have been https://archive.open-services.net/bin/view/Main/QmSpecificationV2.html

All others were verified as correct.

Answer 5 · 2019-01-22T16:20:00.000Z

For QM spec: https://open-services.net/wiki/quality-management/index.html should have been https://archive.open-services.net/bin/view/Main/QmSpecificationV2.html

All others were verified as correct.

Just fixed it.

Answer 6 · 2019-05-21T08:44:02.000Z

@jamsden, @ndjc: so, I have slept on this and thought about a multitude of versions of the spec and how we consider them "complete", "authoritative", "obsolete" etc. So, I have switched from a table to a simple list with all the links present. See a side-by-side comparison:

We have a few more options: remove the "Governing TC" column and stack the links in the Status column (while renaming it to Editions, for example, and removing a link from the title). Also, we can use a dropdown instead of linked labels but that will prevent us from color-coding them.

I was thinking to use them in the following way:

green for current finalised specs
blue for reviewed drafts
orange for Final specs
light blue for drafts
grey for obsolete specs

https://getbootstrap.com/docs/3.4/components/#available-variations

Answer 7 · 2019-05-21T08:57:58.000Z

And ofc we can show a tooltip for people who are not fluent in abbrspeak:

And this is how a dropdown can look like (did not have time to fix the styles but hope @gabrielfdac can help me out later):

Answer 8 · 2019-05-21T09:02:27.000Z

Work is taking place in #244

Answer 9 · 2019-05-21T13:22:01.000Z

I'm thinking about how this will scale. We will be publishing a lot of revisions of documents, project WD as needed to make the documents visible, PSPRD for public review, PS with various revisions. OASIS project standards, etc. Not all of these will need to be linked to open-services.net as many represent specification lifecycle artifacts rather than published standards.

Documents can be in three places:

oslc-op GitHub - these are specifications under development, specific versions might be tagged, but these will be changing. This is primarily for the PGB and TSC, or anyone contributing to oslc-op
Where OASIS publishes project specification standards track documents for managing specification lifecycle. This is primarily for the OASIS community for reviewing and managing standards track documents.
open-services.net - where developers building client and server applications go to access OSLC related materials.

So I think we should only publish two versions on open-services.net - the finalized 2.x versions that are in common use today, and the latest published OASIS document, regardless of specification status (its noted in the document).

Older versions can be accessed through the archive, OASIS documents or GitHub as needed.

The Domains specifications are a bit different as they are suppose to be the 2.x specifications in the OASIS format. Its not clear we need to publish two versions of these.

Let's discuss.

Answer 10 · 2019-05-21T14:07:40.000Z

Documents can be in three places

I don't think I fully agree with the dichotomy. I think open-services should be a landing place for all people: developers, folks who want to read/review specs and the developers. I honestly don't think the larger OASIS community cares about our specs (other than asking why do we need OSLC) unless we actively engage them.

The generation of the HTML code can be automated through some JSON data and templating. @gabrielfdac should be able to help with that. I think we are not publishing that "lot" that we can't add a link to every major revision of the spec (every CSPRD and higher).

Github tags is the last place we should be forcing people to go through. Moreover, nobody has ever done this before here (as opposed to us tagging releases in Eclipse Lyo) and I don't see a reason to believe some discipline will magically emerge out of nothing. I don't think that adding a link should be that harder than git tagging the repo & making an email/forum announcement.

Just to be clear, my proposal is just to LINK to the documents on open-services. There will be no documents published there. Everything will be hosted in the archive, OASIS, or Github (through GitHack).

we should only publish two versions on open-services.net

Older versions can be accessed through the archive, OASIS documents or GitHub as needed.

All versions will be accessed through the resource where they were originally published. Nothing will be published on open-services.net.

Answer 11 · 2019-05-21T15:22:44.000Z

OSLC specification development can generate a lot of "noise" that is not interesting to people building OSLC client and server apps. This is the reason for separating the specification development vs. specification use concerns.

OASIS will be actually publishing a rendered copy of the specs. The process for doing that is something we need to discuss soon.

Answer 12 · 2019-05-21T16:25:53.000Z

Yes and we can link to those specs. We don't have to announce every link update and save some noise.

…

-- /Andrew (from phone) On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 5:22 PM +0200, "Jim Amsden" <notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com>> wrote: OSLC specification development can generate a lot of "noise" that is not interesting to people building OSLC client and server apps. This is the reason for separating the specification development vs. specification use concerns. OASIS will be actually publishing a rendered copy of the specs. The process for doing that is something we need to discuss soon. — You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#225>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAPZXRC7NJPE4QZM6SX5B3PWQHUJANCNFSM4GKH2ZNA>.