KEMBAR78
Introduction to OSLC and Linked Data | PPT
Uploaded byopenservices
PPT, PDF4,502 views

Introduction to OSLC and Linked Data

The document introduces OSLC (Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration) and its application of linked data principles to enhance software lifecycle integration. It discusses the challenges of traditional point-to-point integrations and presents OSLC as a standardized approach that enables greater collaboration and reuse across tools using URIs and RDF data model. Additionally, it outlines OSLC's architecture, specifications, and benefits such as improved visibility, decreased maintenance costs, and better integration across diverse domains.

Related topics:
Linked Data•
Downloaded 151 times
An Introduction to OSLC and Linked Data OSLC: Lifecycle integration inspired by the web
Objectives and Pre-requisites Objectives:  You will gain an understanding of the OSLC community, linked data, and the OSLC specifications – OSLC = Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Pre-requisites:  none Recommended reading: 1. http://www.linkeddatatools.com/introducing-rdf 2. http://3roundstones.com/linked-data-101/linked-data-tu 2
What’s next The OSLC community Linked data and RDF An example The OSLC specifications 3
The Integration Problem Point-to-point Monocultures Maintenance, management, Integrations lock you in and change costs go up over time don’t scale Ongoing and unexpected costs drain resources End-user productivity suffers: End-user productivity suffers: Either stuck with the wrong tool, Either stuck with the wrong tool, stuck doing manual integration; stuck doing manual integration; often stuck doing both often stuck doing both Creating new Past choices integrations is restrict present Integrations consume more of the IT budget: Integrations consume more of the IT budget: unpredictable action and integration failures are the top 2 causes integration failures are the top 2 causes future vision of software project delays* of software project delays* More limited ability to respond to change More limited ability to respond to change Constrained by exhausted IT budget and lower productivity Constrained by exhausted IT budget and lower productivity * Commissioned study conducted by Forrester Consulting on behalf of IBM. 4
OSLC and Open Community: open collaboration, better integration Identify Iterate on Scenarios working drafts Call it a Gain technical specification consensus, http://open-services.net 5
The Basics: What is OSLC, and why should I care? OSLC is an open community building practical specifications for integrating software OSLC is beneficial to many stakeholders 6
OSLC’s Simple Solution Users can work seamlessly across their tools Architecture of the Web Standard Interfaces Automation Linked Data “Just Enough” integration Increased reuse Increased traceability Monitoring Decreased maintenance costs Better visibility OSLC is an open and scalable approach to lifecycle integration. It simplifies key integration scenarios across heterogeneous tools 7
OSLC’s Big Picture Tests, Libraries, Samples, Examples, The Resource Reference Implementations for OSLC Implementers FFuu ut tu rr OSLL eeHoome OS C H me o CSpp S eec off c De Dev v LINKED DATA PLATFORM WORKING GROUP Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Lifecycle integration inspired by the web Scenario-driven & Solution-oriented Leading choice for strategic integration technology Generally applicable: specs available for many domains covering ALM, DevOps, ISM, and PLM Inspired by the web Free to use and share Changing the industry OSLC: Proven Open Innovative 8
Eclipse Lyo Eclipse project created with the goal of providing tools to enable adoption of OSLC specifications. Content includes  Code libraries (Java, Perl, others under development) – Give developers tools to ease OSLC implementations  Reference implementations of specifications – Provide a starting point for new integrations  Test suites and test reporting. Covers OSLC Core, CM, QM, RM and Asset today. – Accelerate and assess development  Samples, tutorials and documentation – Working samples of OSLC integrations with Bugzilla, Excel, Jazz tools and more. http://eclipse.org/lyo 9
What’s next The OSLC community Linked data and RDF An example The OSLC specifications 10
OSLC turns data into... Requirements Validation Tests Design Implementation T1 R1 D1 I1 R2 D2 I2 T2 Tool A Tool B Tool C Tool D 11
...connected information... Requirements Validation Tests Design Implementation T1 validates validates R1 D1 I1 satisfy implements satisfy implements R2 D2 I2 validates validates T2 Tool A Tool B Tool C Tool D Which requirements for Which requirements for Does every requirement Does every requirement the UI are related to test the UI are related to test have aatest to validate it? have test to validate it? cases that failed on their cases that failed on their last run? last run? 12
...that can facilitate applied knowledge Requirements Validation Tests Design Implementation User Interface T1 validates validates R1 D1 I1 satisfy implements Release satisfy implements R2 D2 I2 validates validates T2 Processing Engine Tool A Tool B Tool C Tool D Why is the number of Why is the number of How much faster is work How much faster is work failed test cases for the UI failed test cases for the UI progressing on the UI progressing on the UI increasing in each increasing in each versus the Processing versus the Processing iteration? iteration? Engine? Engine? 13
OSLC links lifecycle data 14
Linked Data and RDF Tim Berners-Lee’s four principles for linking data: 1. Use URIs as names for things 2. Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names 3. When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information using the standards (RDF, SPARQL) 4. Include links to other URIs so that they can discover more things “Instead of defining a new data model, OSLC’s resource and property-value approach is based on industry standard Resource Description Framework (RDF) data model.” Adapted from: http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/ OslcCoreSpecification 15
RDF Concepts OSLC applies some RDF key concepts: 1. Graph data model 2. URI-based vocabulary 3. Format - Serialization syntaxes (RDF/XML, Turtle, JSON) 4. Datatypes 5. Literals 6. Expression of simple facts 7. Entailment We’ll briefly look at some of them. 16
1. OSLC uses an RDF graph data model Predicate Subject Object owns Amanda Car validates Test Case 1 Requirement 1 The predicate provides the property or relationship between the subject and object. Adapted from: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#section-data-model 17
2. OSLC uses a URI-based vocabulary When there is a need to identify anything in OSLC, use a URI (there are a few exceptions). Using URIs allows everything to be linked together. It also allows common agreed-upon meaning for relationships and for resource types <http://...Test Case 1> <http://...validates> <http://...Requirement 1> OSLC Core URI Naming Guidance: http://open-services.net/wiki/core/OSLC-Core-URI-Naming-Guidance/ 18
3. OSLC allows different RDF formats The RDF model provides for describing RDF triples. There are various supported formats. Some are specialized for RDF (Turtle) and others are derived from existing formats (XML, JSON). These formats can be exchanged between different applications (tools). OSLC allows different types of format:  RDF/XML  Turtle  JSON OSLC Core Specification: http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreSpecification 19
Examples of different OSLC notations Predicate Subject Object <http://...Test Case 1> <http://...validates> <http://...Requirement 1> <http://example.com/TestCases/1> a oslc_qm:TestCase ; Turtle oslc_qm:validatesRequirement <http://example.com/Requirements/1> { "rdf:about": "http://example.com/TestCases/1", "rdf:type": [ { "rdf:resource": "http://open-services.net/ns/qm#TestPlan" } ], JSON "oslc_qm:validatesRequirement": { "rdf:resource": "http://example.com/Requirements/1" } } <oslc_qm:TestCase rdf:about="http://example.com/TestCases/1"> <oslc_qm:validatesRequirement rdf:resource="http://example.com/Requirements/1"/> </oslc_qm:TestCase> RDF/XML 20
What’s next The OSLC community Linked data and RDF An example The OSLC specifications This example is adapted from http://3roundstones.com/linked- data-101/linked-data-tutorial/ [David Wood, 3RoundStonesInc. November2011] 21
Here’s a fictional project Existing product: Lunar Rover 3.0 New Release: Lunar Rover 3.1 Main goal is to improve remote steering Release to orbit date: September 20, 2014 22
Let’s look at the requirements domain Requirement 28465 Improve Remote Steering owner release Lunar Rover 3.1 Bob priority High owned by Iris created on November 24, release to 2011 orbit date September 20, state 2014 Implemented 23
The same information as before, in tabular form Requirement Owner Priority Created on State Release Requirement 28464 Linda Low October 18, New Lunar Rover Add rear FIDO mast 2012 3.1 Requirement 28465 Bob High November 24, Implemented Lunar Rover Improve Remote 2011 3.1 Steering Requirement 28466 Tanuj Medium September 9, Reviewed Lunar Rover Rebuild wheels for soil 2012 3.1 excavation Rover Release Owned by Release to orbit date Lunar Rover 3.0 Cheng August 16, 2011 Lunar Rover 3.1 Iris Sept 14, 2014 24
Let’s look at the quality domain Test Case 35645: Test Steering owner release Lunar Rover 3.1 Janet priority High owned by Iris created on December 7, release to 2011 orbit date September 20, state 2014 Executed result pass 25
Let’s add more relationships validated by Test Case 35645: Test Steering release Requirement 28465 Improve Remote Steering owner Janet release Lunar Rover owner Bob 3.1 priority High priority High created on owner December Iris 7, 2011 created on November 24, 2011 state release to Executed orbit date September 20, 2014 state Implemented result pass 26
The same information as before, in tabular form Requirement Owner Priority Created State Release Validated by on Requirement Linda Low October 18, New Lunar 28464 Add rear 2012 Rover 3.1 FIDO mast Requirement Bob High November Implemented Lunar Test Case 28465 Improve 24, 2011 Rover 3.1 35645: Test Remote Steering Steering Requirement Tanuj Medium September Reviewed Lunar Lunar Rover 3.1 28466 Rebuild 9, 2012 Rover 3.1 wheels for soil excavation Rover Owner Release to Test Case Owner Priority ... Release orbit date Lunar Cheng August 16, 2011 Test Case 35645 Janet High ... Rover 3.0 Test Steering Lunar Iris Sept 14, 2014 Lunar Rover 3.1 Iris ... Rover 3.1 27
RDF triple (subject-predicate-object) Triple Subject = Resource Predicate = Object = Could be a = always a URI Relationship or URI (which could refer property = Always a to a resource) or a URI literal value (value to work with and show users) Requirement validated by Test Case 28465 Improve 35645: Test Remote Steering Steering priority High 28
RDF triple (subject-predicate-object) Triple Subject = Resource Predicate = Object = Could be a = always a URI Relationship or URI (which could refer property = Always a to a resource) or a URI literal value (value to work with and show users) <http://...require <http://...validatedby> <http://...testcas ment28465_ e35645_test_ste improve_remote ering> steering> <http://...priority> “High” 29
Let’s add more relationships Work Item 38759 implements validated by Test Case 35645: Test Steering release Requirement 28465 Improve Remote Steering owner Janet owner release Bob Lunar Rover 3.1 priority High priority High owner created on December Iris 7, 2011 created on November 24, state 2011 release to orbit date Executed September 20, 2014 state Implemented result pass 30
There is a web of URIs around a development effort <http://.../build> <http://.../testresult > <http://.../change <http://.../build> request> <http://.../build> <http://.../test <http://.../workitem <http://.../testresult <http://.../req> case> > > <http://.../test case> <http://.../bug> <http://.../workitem > <http://.../build> <http://.../req> <http://.../change request> <http://.../workitem <http://.../test <http://.../bug> > <http://.../release> <http://.../req> case> <http://.../build> <http://.../bug> validate <http://.../build> <http://.../workitem <http://.../test <http://.../req> > case> <http://.../workitem <http://.../build> <http://.../change <http://.../test > request> case> <http://.../change <http://.../change <http://.../req> request> request> <http://.../testresult > <http://.../testresult > <http://.../testresult > <http://.../change request> 31
OSLC principles Tim Berners-Lee’s four principles applied to OSLC:  Use URIs as names for things – In OSLC, each artifact in the lifecycle (for example, requirements, change requests, test cases...) is identified by a URI.  Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names. – In OSLC, each artifact in the lifecycle is an HTTP resource. Standard HTTP methods (GET, PUT, POST, DELETE) are used to interact with them.  When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information using the standards (RDF*, SPARQL) – Each OSLC resource has an RDF representation. OSLC resources can be queried using SPARQL.  Include links to other URIs so that they can discover more things. – OSLC lifecycle artifacts are linked by relationships (for example, validatesRequirement or testedByTestCase) which are defined by URIs. 32
What’s next The OSLC community Linked data and RDF An example The OSLC specifications 33
Anatomy of a specification Core: Specifies the primary integration OSLC Core Specification techniques for integrating lifecycle tools – the standard rules and patterns for using HTTP and RDF that all the domain How workgroups must adopt in their specifications Domain: Defines integration scenarios OSLC Change Mgt for a given lifecycle topic and specifies a Specification common vocabulary for the lifecycle artifacts needed to support the scenarios. OSLC Requirements Example: The Core specification Specification describes Delegated UIs and Creation Factories and states that OSLC service providers MAY provide them. The Change Management specification OSLC Domain X states that CM service providers MUST Specification provide them. http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreSpecification 34
OSLC defines the following technical areas: 1. Discovery of 2. HTTP C.R.U.D. for capabilities resources 6. UI Previews for 3. Standard resource Resource Links representations 5. Delegated UI for 4. Querying for Create and Select resources 35
First, some terminology (before we get to #1) OSLC Service These catalogs are used in the discovery of Provider catalog OSLC service providers. They help to simplify the configuration of tools that will integrate provides with providers of OSLC-defined services. example: IBM Rational Team Concert OSLC Service A product or online service offering that Provider provides an implementation of one or more OSLC Services, which may themselves provides an implement different OSLC Domain example: IBM Rational Team implementation of specifications Concert project area Set of capabilities that enable a web client to OSLC Service create, retrieve, update and delete resources managed by an ALM or PLM product or online service offering and associated with one example: Change Management OSLC Domain capability manages Managed by an OSLC Service, may have properties and may link to other resources including those provided by other OSLC OSLC Resource example: work item (bug, Services. defect, enhancement request) 36
1. Discovery of capabilities Starting from the catalog you can discover services and their capabilities. This is a common pattern in OSLC. OSLC capabilities: Delegated UI Dialog allows you to create or find resources using a UI provided by the OSLC tool Creation Factory allows you to create resources programmatically Query Capability allows you to query for resources 37
2. HTTP C.R.U.D OSLC allows manipulation of resources using standard HTTP C.R.U.D Create = POST Request = GET Update = PUT Delete = DELETE 38
Resource Creation (Create) Create a resource using HTTP POST, with the resource body in format of choice  URI for doing the POST is defined in the oslc:ServiceProvider in the oslc:creationFactory service Response is a 201-Created with Location HTTP header indicating URI for resource Request may be rejected for any number of reasons  Insufficient permissions  Missing required values  Invalid data choices  ...and … and ... Valid resource formats for creation are defined by:  domain specifications  service provider may define its own resources and formats  optionally, by resource shape associated with creation factory 39
Resource Retrieval (Request) Use HTTP GET and standard HTTP content negotiation  Client uses HTTP Accept request header to specify desired resource formats Accept: application/json, application/xml Use standard content(MIME) types Partial representations can be requested via HTTP URL key=value pair as ? oslc.properties=  Allows for minimal retrieval of properties  Get Defect 123 (all properties) GET http://bugs/123  Get Defect 123 (just title and status) GET http://bugs/123?oslc.properties=dcterms:title,oslc_cm:status 40
Resource Modification (Update) Use HTTP GET to get resource properties to be updated  You’ll get an ETag back Change only the property values you need to change  Clients must preserve unknown content Use HTTP PUT to send updated resource  Use If-Match HTTP request header with ETag, services may reject your request without it  HTTP PUT will completely replace the resource representation  We are moving towards PATCH – new HTTP verb http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5789 It is possible to update only selected properties 41
Resource Deletion (Delete) Use HTTP DELETE on the resource identifier May not be allowed Response usually: • 200-OK • 204-No-Content • 400-Bad-Request • 403-Forbidden 42
3. Resource representations OSLC services should handle any type of resource  Not just those defined by OSLC Resources defined by OSLC use RDF data model  therefore are simply defined by their set of properties OSLC services MUST produce and consume RDF/XML representations  Clients and services MUST NOT assume any subset of RDF/XML Other representations are allowed such as:  XML: OSLC defined format that allows for consistent formats and is RDF/XML valid  JSON: Rules for representing namespaces and QName properties  Turtle: No constraints, use as is (may be preferred by future specs)  Atom Syndication Format: <atom:content> SHOULD be RDF/XML 43
A few words on Resource Linking Links are properties where the property values are URIs Turtle format for a bug resource (abbreviated) <http://example.com/bugs/2314> a oslc_cm:ChangeRequest ; dcterms:relation <http://server/app/bugs/1235> ; Don't make assumptions about the target of links  OSLC supports an open model  Needed to achieve goal of “loosely coupled” integrations  Clients need to be flexible and expect anything Sometimes we need to provide additional data about links: label, owners, and so on. Special cases where links need more representation 44
4. Querying for resources Query capability has base URI Clients form query URI and HTTP GET the results OSLC services MAY support OSLC Query Syntax  http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecQuery 45
Query syntax overview  Filter results by appending “oslc.where=” with query clause to query base URI  Only boolean operation allowed is “and” which represents conjunction  “or” for disjunction is not defined in the interests of keeping the syntax simple.  Retrieve just what you want with “oslc.select=”  Defined ordering using “oslc.orderBy=”  Full-text search via “oslc.searchTerms=” Comparison Operators = test for equality != test for inequality 'in' operator: < test less-than Test for equality to any of the values in a list. The list is a > test greater-than comma-separated sequence <= test less-than or equal of values, enclosed in square >= test greater-than or equal brackets: in [“high”,”critical”] 46
Query syntax example Find high severity bugs created after April fools day http://example.com/bugs?oslc.where= cm:severity="high" and dcterms:created>"2010-04-01" Find bugs related to test case 31459 http://example.com/bugs?oslc.prefix=qm= <http://qm.example.com/ns>& oslc.where=qm:testcase=<http://example.com/tests/31459> Find all bugs created by John Smith http://example.com/bugs?oslc.where= dcterms:creator{ foaf:givenName="John" and foaf:familyName="Smith"} 47
5. Delegated UI renders the source app UI in the target app A delegated UI renders the source application UI in the target application. This example shows the contributed/delegated 2. iframe's src Rational Team Concert Work Item search set to delegated dialog being rendered in an OSLC Quality UI's URL Management application. 1. Click to launch delegated UI 4. Click OK. Sends message 3. Selection (link+label) to made parent window 48
Delegated UI key points Delegated UIs support both creation and selection of resources Two communication protocols are supported for iframes:  HTML5 postMessage() ← preferred method – Supported in most modern browers  Window object's window.name – Supported in older browsers and Eclipse embedded web widget  Consumer selects which protocol to use, informs provider via fragment identifier Tremendous value for resource creation  Traditionally most service logic was communicated to client and new dialog built  Now the rules for creation and dialog change as needed Prefilling of creation dialog done by “creating” a dialog resource  HTTP POST of resource format to creation dialog URL, response is URL of dialog prefilled 49
6. UI Preview Scenario supported: hover over link to get in context preview of resource Simple resource format defined and retrieved using HTTP content negotiation Hover over link 50
OSLC specifications also include  Common property and resource definitions covering  Resource shapes  Resource typical properties: title, description, identification, …  Leveraging Dublin Core and FOAF  Discussion/comments  OSLC services MAY offer OAuth 1.0a  Three legged OAuth for webapp to webapp authentication  Two legged OAuth for client to webapp authentication  OSLC services MAY offer HTTP BASIC Auth  User name and password sent “in the clear” with Base64 encoding  Should be done via HTTPS only 51
OSLC Specifications Cover Many Domains Core & Common • Core, Configuration Management, Reporting Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) • Change Management, Quality Management, Requirements Management, Asset Management, Architecture Management, Automation (Software) Project Management • Estimation and Reporting Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) • ALM-PLM Interoperability Integrated Service Management (ISM) • Performance Monitoring, Reconciliation 52
Get Connected with OSLC  Learn more at  http://open-services.net  http://eclipse.org/lyo  Get started with your OSLC “Hello World!” with Eclipse Lyo and existing specs  Join the community and contribute scenarios  Jump in and create specifications that matter to you Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Lifecycle integration inspired by the web 53
Resources OSLC Web Site  http://open-services.net OSLC Primer  http://open-services.net/primer OSLC Tutorial  http://open-services.net/tutorial OSLC Core and Domain specifications  http://open-services.net/specifications/ Eclipse Lyo  http://www.eclipse.org/lyo/ Even more OSLC resources  http://open-services.net/resources/ 54
BACKUP 55
Need better integration approaches Past integration approaches have provided limited choice and coverage. Single repository Point-to-point integrations “Can I really expect one vendor “How can I ever upgrade one to provide all the functionality I tool without breaking need? And what about my everything else?” existing tools?” Past integration approaches have been disruptive and slow to emerge. Universal metadata standard Standard implementations “How did I ever think all those “Did I really believe that every vendors would be able to vendor would rewrite their agree?” tools on a single framework?” 56
Need open collaboration on solutions Past collaborations have fallen short because of limited and restrictive participation. Limited to small set of business partners Point-to-point integrations  Built after the fact with limited  No open process for others to join in product APIs  Limits solution to particular use cases  Solution focuses on two tools in and technologies hand Solution design goals and approach Restrictive licenses and intellectual property  No consensus driven approach  License fees  No external review  Fear of giving up IP  No visibility into solution  Forces alternative solutions 57
OSLC community Vendors, end users, industry consortia Wide range of 40+ organizations have had employees participate in interests, specification development efforts expertise, 100s of developers have used assets from Lyo participation Collaborating on solutions for ALM, DevOps, ISM, PLM  Implementations from IBM Rational, Oracle, IBM Tivoli and open source Growing list of 3rd party adapters from IBM, Kovair, Tasktop, and open implementations source Dozens of end users enabling homegrown tools Change Management, Quality Management, Requirements Management, Asset Management, Specifications for Architecture Management, Automation many domains Product Lifecycle Management, Configuration Management Performance Monitoring, Reconciliation 58
OSLC website at http://open-services.net Register Learn Adopt Browse Participate 59

More Related Content

PDF
[ Capella Day 2019 ] MBSE & PLE: Systematic Reuse of Capella Models with pure...
byObeo
 
PPTX
Model-based Automotive Software Development using Autosar, UML, and Domain-Sp...
byAlexander Nyßen
 
PPT
Dynamic Object-Oriented Requirements System (DOORS)
byDavid Groff
 
PDF
JA 395 module Mono PERC
byNaveed Ahmed
 
PPTX
Malcolm Baldridge Ulusal Kalite Ödülü
byHamedSamadian
 
PDF
OpenSCAP Overview(security scanning for docker image and container)
byJooho Lee
 
PDF
Capella Days 2021 | Enhancing CubeSat design through ARCADIA and Capella: a c...
byObeo
 
PPTX
Test Planning and Test Estimation Techniques
byMurageppa-QA
 
[ Capella Day 2019 ] MBSE & PLE: Systematic Reuse of Capella Models with pure...
byObeo
 
Model-based Automotive Software Development using Autosar, UML, and Domain-Sp...
byAlexander Nyßen
 
Dynamic Object-Oriented Requirements System (DOORS)
byDavid Groff
 
JA 395 module Mono PERC
byNaveed Ahmed
 
Malcolm Baldridge Ulusal Kalite Ödülü
byHamedSamadian
 
OpenSCAP Overview(security scanning for docker image and container)
byJooho Lee
 
Capella Days 2021 | Enhancing CubeSat design through ARCADIA and Capella: a c...
byObeo
 
Test Planning and Test Estimation Techniques
byMurageppa-QA
 

Similar to Introduction to OSLC and Linked Data

PDF
Oslc for owf think tank on open forges
bySteve Speicher
 
PDF
Innovate 2010-oslc-jazz
byDavid M. Johnson
 
PDF
Continuous Delivery Overview
byWill Iverson
 
PDF
EclipseCon 2013 Learn and share about integrations using Eclipse Lyo, OSLC an...
bySteve Speicher
 
PDF
ALM Integration in a Web 2.0 World
byoslc
 
KEY
Supporting Developers, Supporting Research
byPaul Walk
 
PPTX
Answer powerpoint template
byAnswer Consulting
 
PDF
Fostering innovation and efficiency through collaborative change management
byIBM Rational software
 
PDF
Fundamentals of Using Open Source Code to Build Products
byBrian Warner
 
PPT
Introduction to OSLC
byopenservices
 
PPTX
Microsoft ALM Platform Overview
bySteve Lange
 
PPTX
Collab net overview_june 30 slide show
bysfelsenthal
 
PPT
Innovate2011 DevOps TSRM RTC
bySteve Speicher
 
PPT
RSA and RAD 8.5 Top New Value Features
byRoger Snook
 
PDF
Code Reuse Made Easy: Uncovering the Hidden Gems of Corporate and Open Source...
byPerforce
 
PDF
OpenEdge Character UI - Where to go?
byGabriel Lucaciu
 
PDF
Seaside — Agile Software Development
byLukas Renggli
 
PDF
Agile Seaside
byESUG
 
PDF
"Integrating Open Source into Your Business" by Adam Jollans @ eLiberatica 2008
byeLiberatica
 
PPTX
The Boundaryless Value-Chain
byPeter Evans-Greenwood
 
Oslc for owf think tank on open forges
bySteve Speicher
 
Innovate 2010-oslc-jazz
byDavid M. Johnson
 
Continuous Delivery Overview
byWill Iverson
 
EclipseCon 2013 Learn and share about integrations using Eclipse Lyo, OSLC an...
bySteve Speicher
 
ALM Integration in a Web 2.0 World
byoslc
 
Supporting Developers, Supporting Research
byPaul Walk
 
Answer powerpoint template
byAnswer Consulting
 
Fostering innovation and efficiency through collaborative change management
byIBM Rational software
 
Fundamentals of Using Open Source Code to Build Products
byBrian Warner
 
Introduction to OSLC
byopenservices
 
Microsoft ALM Platform Overview
bySteve Lange
 
Collab net overview_june 30 slide show
bysfelsenthal
 
Innovate2011 DevOps TSRM RTC
bySteve Speicher
 
RSA and RAD 8.5 Top New Value Features
byRoger Snook
 
Code Reuse Made Easy: Uncovering the Hidden Gems of Corporate and Open Source...
byPerforce
 
OpenEdge Character UI - Where to go?
byGabriel Lucaciu
 
Seaside — Agile Software Development
byLukas Renggli
 
Agile Seaside
byESUG
 
"Integrating Open Source into Your Business" by Adam Jollans @ eLiberatica 2008
byeLiberatica
 
The Boundaryless Value-Chain
byPeter Evans-Greenwood
 

Introduction to OSLC and Linked Data

  • 1.
    An Introduction toOSLC and Linked Data OSLC: Lifecycle integration inspired by the web
  • 2.
    Objectives and Pre-requisites Objectives:  You will gain an understanding of the OSLC community, linked data, and the OSLC specifications – OSLC = Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Pre-requisites:  none Recommended reading: 1. http://www.linkeddatatools.com/introducing-rdf 2. http://3roundstones.com/linked-data-101/linked-data-tu 2
  • 3.
    What’s next The OSLCcommunity Linked data and RDF An example The OSLC specifications 3
  • 4.
    The Integration Problem Point-to-point Monocultures Maintenance, management, Integrations lock you in and change costs go up over time don’t scale Ongoing and unexpected costs drain resources End-user productivity suffers: End-user productivity suffers: Either stuck with the wrong tool, Either stuck with the wrong tool, stuck doing manual integration; stuck doing manual integration; often stuck doing both often stuck doing both Creating new Past choices integrations is restrict present Integrations consume more of the IT budget: Integrations consume more of the IT budget: unpredictable action and integration failures are the top 2 causes integration failures are the top 2 causes future vision of software project delays* of software project delays* More limited ability to respond to change More limited ability to respond to change Constrained by exhausted IT budget and lower productivity Constrained by exhausted IT budget and lower productivity * Commissioned study conducted by Forrester Consulting on behalf of IBM. 4
  • 5.
    OSLC and OpenCommunity: open collaboration, better integration Identify Iterate on Scenarios working drafts Call it a Gain technical specification consensus, http://open-services.net 5
  • 6.
    The Basics: Whatis OSLC, and why should I care? OSLC is an open community building practical specifications for integrating software OSLC is beneficial to many stakeholders 6
  • 7.
    OSLC’s Simple Solution Users can work seamlessly across their tools Architecture of the Web Standard Interfaces Automation Linked Data “Just Enough” integration Increased reuse Increased traceability Monitoring Decreased maintenance costs Better visibility OSLC is an open and scalable approach to lifecycle integration. It simplifies key integration scenarios across heterogeneous tools 7
  • 8.
    OSLC’s Big Picture Tests, Libraries, Samples, Examples, The Resource Reference Implementations for OSLC Implementers FFuu ut tu rr OSLL eeHoome OS C H me o CSpp S eec off c De Dev v LINKED DATA PLATFORM WORKING GROUP Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Lifecycle integration inspired by the web Scenario-driven & Solution-oriented Leading choice for strategic integration technology Generally applicable: specs available for many domains covering ALM, DevOps, ISM, and PLM Inspired by the web Free to use and share Changing the industry OSLC: Proven Open Innovative 8
  • 9.
    Eclipse Lyo Eclipse projectcreated with the goal of providing tools to enable adoption of OSLC specifications. Content includes  Code libraries (Java, Perl, others under development) – Give developers tools to ease OSLC implementations  Reference implementations of specifications – Provide a starting point for new integrations  Test suites and test reporting. Covers OSLC Core, CM, QM, RM and Asset today. – Accelerate and assess development  Samples, tutorials and documentation – Working samples of OSLC integrations with Bugzilla, Excel, Jazz tools and more. http://eclipse.org/lyo 9
  • 10.
    What’s next The OSLCcommunity Linked data and RDF An example The OSLC specifications 10
  • 11.
    OSLC turns datainto... Requirements Validation Tests Design Implementation T1 R1 D1 I1 R2 D2 I2 T2 Tool A Tool B Tool C Tool D 11
  • 12.
    ...connected information... Requirements Validation Tests Design Implementation T1 validates validates R1 D1 I1 satisfy implements satisfy implements R2 D2 I2 validates validates T2 Tool A Tool B Tool C Tool D Which requirements for Which requirements for Does every requirement Does every requirement the UI are related to test the UI are related to test have aatest to validate it? have test to validate it? cases that failed on their cases that failed on their last run? last run? 12
  • 13.
    ...that can facilitateapplied knowledge Requirements Validation Tests Design Implementation User Interface T1 validates validates R1 D1 I1 satisfy implements Release satisfy implements R2 D2 I2 validates validates T2 Processing Engine Tool A Tool B Tool C Tool D Why is the number of Why is the number of How much faster is work How much faster is work failed test cases for the UI failed test cases for the UI progressing on the UI progressing on the UI increasing in each increasing in each versus the Processing versus the Processing iteration? iteration? Engine? Engine? 13
  • 14.
  • 15.
    Linked Data andRDF Tim Berners-Lee’s four principles for linking data: 1. Use URIs as names for things 2. Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names 3. When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information using the standards (RDF, SPARQL) 4. Include links to other URIs so that they can discover more things “Instead of defining a new data model, OSLC’s resource and property-value approach is based on industry standard Resource Description Framework (RDF) data model.” Adapted from: http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/ OslcCoreSpecification 15
  • 16.
    RDF Concepts OSLC appliessome RDF key concepts: 1. Graph data model 2. URI-based vocabulary 3. Format - Serialization syntaxes (RDF/XML, Turtle, JSON) 4. Datatypes 5. Literals 6. Expression of simple facts 7. Entailment We’ll briefly look at some of them. 16
  • 17.
    1. OSLC usesan RDF graph data model Predicate Subject Object owns Amanda Car validates Test Case 1 Requirement 1 The predicate provides the property or relationship between the subject and object. Adapted from: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#section-data-model 17
  • 18.
    2. OSLC usesa URI-based vocabulary When there is a need to identify anything in OSLC, use a URI (there are a few exceptions). Using URIs allows everything to be linked together. It also allows common agreed-upon meaning for relationships and for resource types <http://...Test Case 1> <http://...validates> <http://...Requirement 1> OSLC Core URI Naming Guidance: http://open-services.net/wiki/core/OSLC-Core-URI-Naming-Guidance/ 18
  • 19.
    3. OSLC allowsdifferent RDF formats The RDF model provides for describing RDF triples. There are various supported formats. Some are specialized for RDF (Turtle) and others are derived from existing formats (XML, JSON). These formats can be exchanged between different applications (tools). OSLC allows different types of format:  RDF/XML  Turtle  JSON OSLC Core Specification: http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreSpecification 19
  • 20.
    Examples of differentOSLC notations Predicate Subject Object <http://...Test Case 1> <http://...validates> <http://...Requirement 1> <http://example.com/TestCases/1> a oslc_qm:TestCase ; Turtle oslc_qm:validatesRequirement <http://example.com/Requirements/1> { "rdf:about": "http://example.com/TestCases/1", "rdf:type": [ { "rdf:resource": "http://open-services.net/ns/qm#TestPlan" } ], JSON "oslc_qm:validatesRequirement": { "rdf:resource": "http://example.com/Requirements/1" } } <oslc_qm:TestCase rdf:about="http://example.com/TestCases/1"> <oslc_qm:validatesRequirement rdf:resource="http://example.com/Requirements/1"/> </oslc_qm:TestCase> RDF/XML 20
  • 21.
    What’s next The OSLCcommunity Linked data and RDF An example The OSLC specifications This example is adapted from http://3roundstones.com/linked- data-101/linked-data-tutorial/ [David Wood, 3RoundStonesInc. November2011] 21
  • 22.
    Here’s a fictionalproject Existing product: Lunar Rover 3.0 New Release: Lunar Rover 3.1 Main goal is to improve remote steering Release to orbit date: September 20, 2014 22
  • 23.
    Let’s look atthe requirements domain Requirement 28465 Improve Remote Steering owner release Lunar Rover 3.1 Bob priority High owned by Iris created on November 24, release to 2011 orbit date September 20, state 2014 Implemented 23
  • 24.
    The same informationas before, in tabular form Requirement Owner Priority Created on State Release Requirement 28464 Linda Low October 18, New Lunar Rover Add rear FIDO mast 2012 3.1 Requirement 28465 Bob High November 24, Implemented Lunar Rover Improve Remote 2011 3.1 Steering Requirement 28466 Tanuj Medium September 9, Reviewed Lunar Rover Rebuild wheels for soil 2012 3.1 excavation Rover Release Owned by Release to orbit date Lunar Rover 3.0 Cheng August 16, 2011 Lunar Rover 3.1 Iris Sept 14, 2014 24
  • 25.
    Let’s look atthe quality domain Test Case 35645: Test Steering owner release Lunar Rover 3.1 Janet priority High owned by Iris created on December 7, release to 2011 orbit date September 20, state 2014 Executed result pass 25
  • 26.
    Let’s add morerelationships validated by Test Case 35645: Test Steering release Requirement 28465 Improve Remote Steering owner Janet release Lunar Rover owner Bob 3.1 priority High priority High created on owner December Iris 7, 2011 created on November 24, 2011 state release to Executed orbit date September 20, 2014 state Implemented result pass 26
  • 27.
    The same informationas before, in tabular form Requirement Owner Priority Created State Release Validated by on Requirement Linda Low October 18, New Lunar 28464 Add rear 2012 Rover 3.1 FIDO mast Requirement Bob High November Implemented Lunar Test Case 28465 Improve 24, 2011 Rover 3.1 35645: Test Remote Steering Steering Requirement Tanuj Medium September Reviewed Lunar Lunar Rover 3.1 28466 Rebuild 9, 2012 Rover 3.1 wheels for soil excavation Rover Owner Release to Test Case Owner Priority ... Release orbit date Lunar Cheng August 16, 2011 Test Case 35645 Janet High ... Rover 3.0 Test Steering Lunar Iris Sept 14, 2014 Lunar Rover 3.1 Iris ... Rover 3.1 27
  • 28.
    RDF triple (subject-predicate-object) Triple Subject = Resource Predicate = Object = Could be a = always a URI Relationship or URI (which could refer property = Always a to a resource) or a URI literal value (value to work with and show users) Requirement validated by Test Case 28465 Improve 35645: Test Remote Steering Steering priority High 28
  • 29.
    RDF triple (subject-predicate-object) Triple Subject = Resource Predicate = Object = Could be a = always a URI Relationship or URI (which could refer property = Always a to a resource) or a URI literal value (value to work with and show users) <http://...require <http://...validatedby> <http://...testcas ment28465_ e35645_test_ste improve_remote ering> steering> <http://...priority> “High” 29
  • 30.
    Let’s add morerelationships Work Item 38759 implements validated by Test Case 35645: Test Steering release Requirement 28465 Improve Remote Steering owner Janet owner release Bob Lunar Rover 3.1 priority High priority High owner created on December Iris 7, 2011 created on November 24, state 2011 release to orbit date Executed September 20, 2014 state Implemented result pass 30
  • 31.
    There is aweb of URIs around a development effort <http://.../build> <http://.../testresult > <http://.../change <http://.../build> request> <http://.../build> <http://.../test <http://.../workitem <http://.../testresult <http://.../req> case> > > <http://.../test case> <http://.../bug> <http://.../workitem > <http://.../build> <http://.../req> <http://.../change request> <http://.../workitem <http://.../test <http://.../bug> > <http://.../release> <http://.../req> case> <http://.../build> <http://.../bug> validate <http://.../build> <http://.../workitem <http://.../test <http://.../req> > case> <http://.../workitem <http://.../build> <http://.../change <http://.../test > request> case> <http://.../change <http://.../change <http://.../req> request> request> <http://.../testresult > <http://.../testresult > <http://.../testresult > <http://.../change request> 31
  • 32.
    OSLC principles Tim Berners-Lee’sfour principles applied to OSLC:  Use URIs as names for things – In OSLC, each artifact in the lifecycle (for example, requirements, change requests, test cases...) is identified by a URI.  Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names. – In OSLC, each artifact in the lifecycle is an HTTP resource. Standard HTTP methods (GET, PUT, POST, DELETE) are used to interact with them.  When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information using the standards (RDF*, SPARQL) – Each OSLC resource has an RDF representation. OSLC resources can be queried using SPARQL.  Include links to other URIs so that they can discover more things. – OSLC lifecycle artifacts are linked by relationships (for example, validatesRequirement or testedByTestCase) which are defined by URIs. 32
  • 33.
    What’s next The OSLCcommunity Linked data and RDF An example The OSLC specifications 33
  • 34.
    Anatomy of aspecification Core: Specifies the primary integration OSLC Core Specification techniques for integrating lifecycle tools – the standard rules and patterns for using HTTP and RDF that all the domain How workgroups must adopt in their specifications Domain: Defines integration scenarios OSLC Change Mgt for a given lifecycle topic and specifies a Specification common vocabulary for the lifecycle artifacts needed to support the scenarios. OSLC Requirements Example: The Core specification Specification describes Delegated UIs and Creation Factories and states that OSLC service providers MAY provide them. The Change Management specification OSLC Domain X states that CM service providers MUST Specification provide them. http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreSpecification 34
  • 35.
    OSLC defines thefollowing technical areas: 1. Discovery of 2. HTTP C.R.U.D. for capabilities resources 6. UI Previews for 3. Standard resource Resource Links representations 5. Delegated UI for 4. Querying for Create and Select resources 35
  • 36.
    First, some terminology(before we get to #1) OSLC Service These catalogs are used in the discovery of Provider catalog OSLC service providers. They help to simplify the configuration of tools that will integrate provides with providers of OSLC-defined services. example: IBM Rational Team Concert OSLC Service A product or online service offering that Provider provides an implementation of one or more OSLC Services, which may themselves provides an implement different OSLC Domain example: IBM Rational Team implementation of specifications Concert project area Set of capabilities that enable a web client to OSLC Service create, retrieve, update and delete resources managed by an ALM or PLM product or online service offering and associated with one example: Change Management OSLC Domain capability manages Managed by an OSLC Service, may have properties and may link to other resources including those provided by other OSLC OSLC Resource example: work item (bug, Services. defect, enhancement request) 36
  • 37.
    1. Discovery ofcapabilities Starting from the catalog you can discover services and their capabilities. This is a common pattern in OSLC. OSLC capabilities: Delegated UI Dialog allows you to create or find resources using a UI provided by the OSLC tool Creation Factory allows you to create resources programmatically Query Capability allows you to query for resources 37
  • 38.
    2. HTTP C.R.U.D OSLCallows manipulation of resources using standard HTTP C.R.U.D Create = POST Request = GET Update = PUT Delete = DELETE 38
  • 39.
    Resource Creation (Create) Createa resource using HTTP POST, with the resource body in format of choice  URI for doing the POST is defined in the oslc:ServiceProvider in the oslc:creationFactory service Response is a 201-Created with Location HTTP header indicating URI for resource Request may be rejected for any number of reasons  Insufficient permissions  Missing required values  Invalid data choices  ...and … and ... Valid resource formats for creation are defined by:  domain specifications  service provider may define its own resources and formats  optionally, by resource shape associated with creation factory 39
  • 40.
    Resource Retrieval (Request) UseHTTP GET and standard HTTP content negotiation  Client uses HTTP Accept request header to specify desired resource formats Accept: application/json, application/xml Use standard content(MIME) types Partial representations can be requested via HTTP URL key=value pair as ? oslc.properties=  Allows for minimal retrieval of properties  Get Defect 123 (all properties) GET http://bugs/123  Get Defect 123 (just title and status) GET http://bugs/123?oslc.properties=dcterms:title,oslc_cm:status 40
  • 41.
    Resource Modification (Update) UseHTTP GET to get resource properties to be updated  You’ll get an ETag back Change only the property values you need to change  Clients must preserve unknown content Use HTTP PUT to send updated resource  Use If-Match HTTP request header with ETag, services may reject your request without it  HTTP PUT will completely replace the resource representation  We are moving towards PATCH – new HTTP verb http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5789 It is possible to update only selected properties 41
  • 42.
    Resource Deletion (Delete) UseHTTP DELETE on the resource identifier May not be allowed Response usually: • 200-OK • 204-No-Content • 400-Bad-Request • 403-Forbidden 42
  • 43.
    3. Resource representations OSLCservices should handle any type of resource  Not just those defined by OSLC Resources defined by OSLC use RDF data model  therefore are simply defined by their set of properties OSLC services MUST produce and consume RDF/XML representations  Clients and services MUST NOT assume any subset of RDF/XML Other representations are allowed such as:  XML: OSLC defined format that allows for consistent formats and is RDF/XML valid  JSON: Rules for representing namespaces and QName properties  Turtle: No constraints, use as is (may be preferred by future specs)  Atom Syndication Format: <atom:content> SHOULD be RDF/XML 43
  • 44.
    A few wordson Resource Linking Links are properties where the property values are URIs Turtle format for a bug resource (abbreviated) <http://example.com/bugs/2314> a oslc_cm:ChangeRequest ; dcterms:relation <http://server/app/bugs/1235> ; Don't make assumptions about the target of links  OSLC supports an open model  Needed to achieve goal of “loosely coupled” integrations  Clients need to be flexible and expect anything Sometimes we need to provide additional data about links: label, owners, and so on. Special cases where links need more representation 44
  • 45.
    4. Querying forresources Query capability has base URI Clients form query URI and HTTP GET the results OSLC services MAY support OSLC Query Syntax  http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecQuery 45
  • 46.
    Query syntax overview  Filter results by appending “oslc.where=” with query clause to query base URI  Only boolean operation allowed is “and” which represents conjunction  “or” for disjunction is not defined in the interests of keeping the syntax simple.  Retrieve just what you want with “oslc.select=”  Defined ordering using “oslc.orderBy=”  Full-text search via “oslc.searchTerms=” Comparison Operators = test for equality != test for inequality 'in' operator: < test less-than Test for equality to any of the values in a list. The list is a > test greater-than comma-separated sequence <= test less-than or equal of values, enclosed in square >= test greater-than or equal brackets: in [“high”,”critical”] 46
  • 47.
    Query syntax example Findhigh severity bugs created after April fools day http://example.com/bugs?oslc.where= cm:severity="high" and dcterms:created>"2010-04-01" Find bugs related to test case 31459 http://example.com/bugs?oslc.prefix=qm= <http://qm.example.com/ns>& oslc.where=qm:testcase=<http://example.com/tests/31459> Find all bugs created by John Smith http://example.com/bugs?oslc.where= dcterms:creator{ foaf:givenName="John" and foaf:familyName="Smith"} 47
  • 48.
    5. Delegated UIrenders the source app UI in the target app A delegated UI renders the source application UI in the target application. This example shows the contributed/delegated 2. iframe's src Rational Team Concert Work Item search set to delegated dialog being rendered in an OSLC Quality UI's URL Management application. 1. Click to launch delegated UI 4. Click OK. Sends message 3. Selection (link+label) to made parent window 48
  • 49.
    Delegated UI keypoints Delegated UIs support both creation and selection of resources Two communication protocols are supported for iframes:  HTML5 postMessage() ← preferred method – Supported in most modern browers  Window object's window.name – Supported in older browsers and Eclipse embedded web widget  Consumer selects which protocol to use, informs provider via fragment identifier Tremendous value for resource creation  Traditionally most service logic was communicated to client and new dialog built  Now the rules for creation and dialog change as needed Prefilling of creation dialog done by “creating” a dialog resource  HTTP POST of resource format to creation dialog URL, response is URL of dialog prefilled 49
  • 50.
    6. UI Preview Scenariosupported: hover over link to get in context preview of resource Simple resource format defined and retrieved using HTTP content negotiation Hover over link 50
  • 51.
    OSLC specifications alsoinclude  Common property and resource definitions covering  Resource shapes  Resource typical properties: title, description, identification, …  Leveraging Dublin Core and FOAF  Discussion/comments  OSLC services MAY offer OAuth 1.0a  Three legged OAuth for webapp to webapp authentication  Two legged OAuth for client to webapp authentication  OSLC services MAY offer HTTP BASIC Auth  User name and password sent “in the clear” with Base64 encoding  Should be done via HTTPS only 51
  • 52.
    OSLC Specifications CoverMany Domains Core & Common • Core, Configuration Management, Reporting Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) • Change Management, Quality Management, Requirements Management, Asset Management, Architecture Management, Automation (Software) Project Management • Estimation and Reporting Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) • ALM-PLM Interoperability Integrated Service Management (ISM) • Performance Monitoring, Reconciliation 52
  • 53.
    Get Connected withOSLC  Learn more at  http://open-services.net  http://eclipse.org/lyo  Get started with your OSLC “Hello World!” with Eclipse Lyo and existing specs  Join the community and contribute scenarios  Jump in and create specifications that matter to you Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Lifecycle integration inspired by the web 53
  • 54.
    Resources OSLC Web Site  http://open-services.net OSLC Primer  http://open-services.net/primer OSLC Tutorial  http://open-services.net/tutorial OSLC Core and Domain specifications  http://open-services.net/specifications/ Eclipse Lyo  http://www.eclipse.org/lyo/ Even more OSLC resources  http://open-services.net/resources/ 54
  • 55.
  • 56.
    Need better integrationapproaches Past integration approaches have provided limited choice and coverage. Single repository Point-to-point integrations “Can I really expect one vendor “How can I ever upgrade one to provide all the functionality I tool without breaking need? And what about my everything else?” existing tools?” Past integration approaches have been disruptive and slow to emerge. Universal metadata standard Standard implementations “How did I ever think all those “Did I really believe that every vendors would be able to vendor would rewrite their agree?” tools on a single framework?” 56
  • 57.
    Need open collaborationon solutions Past collaborations have fallen short because of limited and restrictive participation. Limited to small set of business partners Point-to-point integrations  Built after the fact with limited  No open process for others to join in product APIs  Limits solution to particular use cases  Solution focuses on two tools in and technologies hand Solution design goals and approach Restrictive licenses and intellectual property  No consensus driven approach  License fees  No external review  Fear of giving up IP  No visibility into solution  Forces alternative solutions 57
  • 58.
    OSLC community Vendors, end users, industry consortia Wide range of 40+ organizations have had employees participate in interests, specification development efforts expertise, 100s of developers have used assets from Lyo participation Collaborating on solutions for ALM, DevOps, ISM, PLM  Implementations from IBM Rational, Oracle, IBM Tivoli and open source Growing list of 3rd party adapters from IBM, Kovair, Tasktop, and open implementations source Dozens of end users enabling homegrown tools Change Management, Quality Management, Requirements Management, Asset Management, Specifications for Architecture Management, Automation many domains Product Lifecycle Management, Configuration Management Performance Monitoring, Reconciliation 58
  • 59.
    OSLC website athttp://open-services.net Register Learn Adopt Browse Participate 59

Editor's Notes

  • #3 After reading this presentation, you’ll gain an understanding of the OSLC community, of linked data concepts, and of the OSLC specification itself.
  • #5 What we have been illustrating, we can call “the integration problem.” The integration problem has been around since the first user wanted two programs to work together. It has only got worse since software got more capable (and more complex), since groups of users wanted to work together across the different tools, and since businesses became more dependent on software. 1. (blues) Traditional (point-to-point) integrations are based on proprietary APIs. This places burdens: On all vendors to invent their own good API (re-inventing the wheel each time), and On all integrators (whether they be vendors, IT administrators, or end users themselves) to understand at least two APIs to create any integration. Experience has shown these integrations to be brittle and difficult to maintain. For IBM: Our t raditional assumption: 12 months, 6 developers; prototype in 2-3 months A starting point like that indicates quite a bit of uncertainty about the effort. 2. (blues) Software monocultures and the “hub-and-spokes” integration pattern, emerged as a way to minimize the negatives associated with traditional integration techniques. Unfortunately, many ecosystem users then suffer from: The inability to use the tools they prefer from within the ecosystem, and The high cost of quitting that ecosystem all together. In the long run, the ecosystem can become a burden to the dominate vendor as they bend to customer pressure to make sure dozens of external integrations work too. Whatever software choices we’ve made in the past, integrations have been yet another proprietary data format that has locked us in. 3. (blues) As time goes by, it isn’t only the visible costs of maintenance, management, and migration that go up: Users also get frustrated, affecting morale and productivity, and The lack of agility can result in lost business opportunities. The costs of supporting these integrations can be near-fatal too! For IBM: Integration PMRs are difficult to diagnose (let alone solve!), consuming resources from new initiatives, and making our clients shoulder the burden of investments that are not showing returns. Customers with low trust that our own products will integrate with each other, let alone 3 rd -party tools Cost (“Integrations consume …”) (see backup slide for stat details): Special skills required to maintain the integrations Risky to change any part of the system Frustrating for IT staff who work to keep the system running for the present instead of innovating for the future Copy and synchronization problems can be difficult to diagnose Productivity Better software either unavailable because it isn’t integrated, or used without being integrated May result in missed business opportunity Copy and synchronization problems can effect business decisions Change The strength that was an integrated software system can become a weakness in the face of smaller, younger, competitors who don’t have to support dozens of special case integrations. Today’s, and tomorrow’s, profits and competiveness are reduced by the effects on IT spending and user productivity.
  • #6 OSLC and its community try to learn from those past integration approach mistakes. OSLC uses a minimalist approach. It does not try to give a complete definition for a given area, and it has a scenario driven scope. The OSLC community co-evolves specifications and implementations, and uses open participation around active core groups.
  • #7 http://open-services.net/wiki/communications/Why-should-you-care-about-OSLC/  
  • #8 You do this everyday! Web browser example. + single web page, data sourced from many places … ads, videos, pictures, tweets, comments, content, more links Linking to application lifecycle data where it is created , instead of copying and synchronizing between tools, is the key insight of OSLC. Doing so using standard interfaces , on top of a proven architecture , has helped many realize the value of OSLC already. With OSLC , instead of worrying about integrating specific tools, we focus on composing a set of capabilities. Animations (OSLC is …) : Approach to integrations Philosophy of specification development Set of specifications that tell you what and how to integrate various capabilities It is also the open community where all this happens 4. Read This has benefits to professional users (5), business leaders (6) and creators of integrations (7)
  • #9 lets take a high-level look at OSLC and its place in the industry OSLC [click] Leading choice …: both for many of our clients who are choosing to use OSLC to integrate their homegrown tools with OSLC-enabled tools and demanding that vendors provide OSLC-based integrations; but also in public interoperability projects such as CESAR and iFEST in Europe, and PROMIS in Japan. There are over 40 publically available tools that can be integrated using OSLC today. [click] Generally applicable: OSLC ‘s original focus was ALM and the IT industry, but just as domain and industry faces similar integration challenges, a solution based on the principles of OSLC can be applied to all of them (and has already been to many) “ Simpler and flexible integrations with OSLC make software more useful and valuable for everyone.” [click] Scenario-driven …: Specifications are written to enable high-priority scenarios, and are not complete until they have been implemented. Think of it as “Agile specification development”. Eclipse Lyo (“Lee-o”) [click] Started in 2011, the Eclipse Lyo project exists to provide an SDK for OSLC developers (NOT an Eclipse plugin) Includes Java and Perl libraries for creating integrations based on OSLC specifications .Net libraries available through the CodePlex project OSLC4Net Libraries (and examples) for consuming OSLC data and for authentication using OAuth are included in the 1.1 (Feb 2013) release Test Suites simplify validation of existing OSLC providers, and enable test-driven development for new ones Reference Implementations for OSLC specifications are (being made) available through Lyo too W3C [click] OSLC has always been based on the “architecture of the web” and Linked Data, as described by Tim Berners-Lee [click] In 2012, IBM, DERI, EMC, Oracle, Red Hat, SemanticWeb.com, and Tasktop submitted parts of the OSLC Core specification to W3C The Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group c currently has 49 participants (all in good standing) representing 30 organizations LDP will serve as the basis for future OSLC specifications A reference implementation of LDP is being developed in Eclipse Lyo OASIS migration [click] On February 20, 2013, the OSLC Steering Committee (with members from Accenture, Creative Intellect, EADS, Siemens, Tasktop, and IBM) announced its intention to migrate OSLC specification development to the OASIS standardization track. Targeting submission (and acceptance) at the May 1 st OASIS Board meeting OASIS Member Section construct allows the OSLC community to continue working the same way and maintain the relationships between domain specifications and the Core spec, while targeting formal standardization too The larger OSLC community continues to center itself at open-services.net; think of OASIS as the subcontractor for specification development and standardization [click] Proven … Open … Innovative Built on proven technology, used in production systems Participation and use open to anyone, everywhere (@ OSLC, Lyo, W3C, and OASIS) As you can hear from developers and users, as you can see with LDP, OSLC brings real innovation to a challenging
  • #10 - project started June 2011 NOT an Eclipse plugin – not related to the Eclipse IDE Standalone set of tools (SDKs, sample, test suites) Eclipse chosen has home for mature governance model, friendly IP policies Lyo 1.0 going through Eclipse approval process now OSLC4J 1.0 (Java SDK) – used in IBM and non-IBM products with OSLC integrations OSLC Test suites Community participation welcome and encouraged
  • #14 Note that in an OSLC context where lifecycle data is linked together, you can then use other tools to perform complex queries of data and analyze trends.
  • #15 Now let’s look at OSLC in a little more detail. OSLC is inspired by Internet principles and implemented with Internet technologies. It uses simple interfaces for the exchange of resources. Everything is loosely coupled as a a “resource” linked together with URLs It is technology neutral and treats all implementations equally It is minimalist and defines no more than necessary for exchange of resources It is incremental. It delivers value now and adds more value over time It is an openly published standard. It is free to implement and irrevocable OSLC uses the architecture of the internet. All data are resources with HTTP URIs Use open standards; use loose coupling; be technology neutral; be scalable; be extensible The data is the thing Use resources and relationships Tools operate on the data Tools execute the process Tools expose their data in a common way (REST) Lifecycle integration = tracing, indexing, analyzing the web of lifecycle data where it lives.
  • #16 OSLC applies Tim Berners-Lee’s four principles for linking data, and is based on the industry standard Resource Description Framework (RDF) model. RDF is: a simple, powerful data model used to define relationships between things designed to work with the architecture of the web the data model for the Web of Data For more information, see http://www.w3.org/RDF/
  • #18 The underlying structure of any expression in RDF is a triple, consisting of a subject, a predicate and an object. Each triple represents a statement of a relationship between the things denoted by the nodes that it links. Each triple has three parts: a subject, an object, and a predicate (also called a property) that denotes a relationship. The assertion of an RDF triple says that some relationship, indicated by the predicate, holds between the things denoted by subject and object of the triple. A set of such triples is called an RDF graph. This can be illustrated by a node and directed-arc diagram, in which each triple is represented as a node-arc-node link (hence the term &quot;graph&quot;). The direction of the arc is significant: it always points toward the object. The nodes of an RDF graph are its subjects and objects . The assertion of an RDF graph amounts to asserting all the triples in it, so the meaning of an RDF graph is the conjunction (logical AND) of the statements corresponding to all the triples it contains.
  • #21 This slide shows the same subject-predicate-object triple example of test case 1 validates requirement 1 represented in different OSLC formats (Turtle, JSON and RDF/XML).
  • #29 Resources: Can represent things on the web, like web pages. These resources are information resources Can represent things not on the web, like people and places. These resources are non-information resources Can represent anything at all Are usually named using URIs May not have a name. May be a blank node. Literal Values: Are values to work with and show users Can be just a string of text. These literals are plain literals Can have a language assigned to them using ISO codes Can have a specific datatype assigned to them. These literals are typed literals Predicates: Are relationships between resources or properties of a resource Are named using URIs Are described in Schema (or vocabularies,or ontologies)
  • #30 Here is a look at it with URI’s in place. OSLC specifications define the “shape” of resources and objects and the meaning of predicates.
  • #31 The Work Item is from the Change Management domain.
  • #33 Now let’s look at how Tim Berners-Lee’s four principles apply to OSLC.
  • #35 OSLC core specification defines: How to use HTTP and RDF How to define resources and services OSLC domain specifications (Change Management, Requirements, etc.) define: What resources and services are required in the domain Resource types, properties and relationships Service providers, creation factories, query capabilities, operations
  • #36 The technical components of the specification are: the discovery of capabilities HTTP CRUD for resources standard resource representations querying for resources a delegated UI for Create and Select UI previews for resource links
  • #37 RTC project area maps to
  • #38 E.g. Service Provider Catalog = RTC Service Provider = RTC Project Area Service = CM capability Resource = Work Item For an example of OSLC service discovery, see http://stevespeicher.blogspot.com/2011/03/determining-how-best-to-participate-in.html
  • #45 http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreSpecAppendixLinks
  • #49 Contributed/delegated RTC Work Item search dialog
  • #51 Small and large previews provided for. Hover “gesture” an implementation detail, i.e. you can activate/retrieve the preview whenever it makes sense.
  • #53 … and there is no reason for them not to cover more! Contribute scenarios and propose new domain workgroups.
  • #54 Some stats OSLC specifications are referenced online 1000s of times everyday Eclipse Lyo assets are used by 100s of developers from around the world Dozens of publically available tools can be integrated using OSLC today, including software from the top 4 ALM vendors (by revenue) and popular Open Source. Participants from over 40 organizations have contributed to OSLC, and 100s of organizations are using and benefiting from OSLC. Lead : demonstrate your leadership in your company and across the industry Influence : affect the outcomes of the work groups by your input; affect your vendors’ evaluation of your request that they implement OSLC Simplify : the software integrations you build and use
  • #57 In the past, integration approaches have also fallen short because of limited choice and coverage, the slowness for the integration approach to emerge, and the disruptiveness of adopting the integration approach.
  • #58 Collaborations in the past have fallen short because of limited and restrictive participation. Participation has been limited to small sets of business partners, and solutions ended up focusing on the few tools in hand. Many times, there ’ s no consensus to the approach, no external reviews, and the end result has restrictive licenses or license fees.
  • #59 The OSLC community collaborates to manage all activity around OSLC. Participants provide a wide range of interests, expertise and participation. They have a growing list of OSLC implementations from IBM and other companies. They have completed specifications for many different domains.
  • #60 The OSLC website at open-services.net is your one stop location for learning, adopting and participating in OSLC. You ’ ll find tools, tutorials and references to help you adopt the specifications, you can browse the current specifications and see available software. You can catch up with what ’ s new in the community, and you can get involved in writing, reviewing and implementing specifications through the workgroups.