W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > September 2017

Relating versions and UC47 (Define update method)

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 10:39:01 -0700
To: "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <e6afb589-52e5-21c4-1111-703db1cc03ea@kcoyle.net>
Here's a (much) more coherent statement of something I started to say
during the meeting yesterday but didn't have my thoughts together.

I created use case 47[1] because I felt that there is an unspoken
assumption behind the discussion of "versions" - which is that each
version is a complete replacement for the previous one(s). That is how I
read the statement about the version delta: "indicating the "type" of
change (addition/removal/update of data etc.)"[2] The implied subject if
that is a single dataset that has been changed. If that is the case,
then we can use "version" in that way. However, there are other
situations that are not captured by that definition but that will arise
in practice.

The example I gave in use case 47 is one in which there is a master
dataset, and that additions and changes to that dataset are issued in
transaction files. A transaction file will have a newer date (or some
other sequential numbering), but it is not a "version" of the master
file; instead, it must be applied to the master file to create a new
master file.

This is only one kind of update. There are also sequential datasets that
may or may not be stand-alone. That is analogous to the issues of a
serial publication. This may include periodic datasets like census
information - each new census provides new information, but would we
call a later census file a version of an earlier one?

Use case 44 [3] (Identification of versioned datasets and subsets) is
also related to this question because it addresses the part/whole
relationship between datasets. Use case 32 [4] (Relationships between
datasets) has elements of this question as well, although it emphasizes
the type of derivation or part/whole relationship.

It may be best to make a clear separation between versions of a dataset
and related datasets that are not one-to-one replacements for another.
If nothing else, our definition of versions needs to make clear what
types of relationships are included in the declaration that one dataset
is a version of another. This is what I mainly find to be missing.

kc
[1] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID47
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2017Sep/0051.html
[3] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID44
[4] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID32


-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Tuesday, 26 September 2017 17:39:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 October 2019 00:15:38 UTC