Re: Versioning of EARL docs

Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb:
> Hi all,
> 
> Can we agree that the version of EARL is primarily determined by its 
> Schema document? The three other specs (HTTP-in-RDF, Content-in-RDF and 
> Pointers-in-RDF) are designed to be supplemental, which is alone of the 
> reasons why they are WG Notes. IMHO, updating HTTP-in-RDF will usually 
> not change the EARL fundamentals, and should therefore not require the 
> version number to change. However, changes to the Schema document will 
> typically have more direct consequences on EARL as a whole.

If we say that EARL is a vocabulary defined by different specifications, 
then the EARL vocabulary _does_ change if one of the parts changes.

Another proposal could be to not version EARL the vocabulary, but only 
the parts. Then the schema document would have to be called "EARL Schema 
1.0", as already written in an earlier mail.

> Personally, I'd favor the second approach for at least HTTP-in-RDF and 
> Content-in-RDF since we do not expect any major changes to these (maybe 
> just some new headers or other refinement but nothing substantial).

The registration of another header to be used in HTTP will not change 
the HTTP-in-RDF schema, but only the http-headers.rdf.

> NOTE: the support document for WCAG 2.0 do not have version numbers. It 
> is currently expected that date references will be used to disambiguate 
> between versions of the "Techniques" or "Understanding" documents.

I think that's a sligtly different thing.

-- 
Johannes Koch
Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology FIT
Web Compliance Center
Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany
Phone: +49-2241-142628    Fax: +49-2241-142065

Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 07:50:23 UTC