[dxwg] Add section on conformance

rob-metalinkage has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/dxwg:

== Add section on conformance ==
There has been some confusion, and discussion around the actual conformance target for profiles. To clarify this two steps are proposed - support for stating this in profile descriptions #521 and updating the abstract model of profiles and introduction.

Proposed text something like:
<text>
Specifications relate to requirements that instances of objects must conform to - i.e. the "conformance target" of the specification. Profiles add further constraints, and hence the conformance target of a profile is a valid subclass of the conformance targets of its base specifications. 

Note that where the conformance target of a profile MyProf  is an information resource, constraints such as "you must include an author reference using property V:P on each instance of type S:C" is a constraint on C, not on P, and hence the profile is a profile of the specification designated by S:, not the vocabulary V.

However, a constraint that "author names must include middle initials" is a constraint on P. In this case MyProf is potentially a profile of both S: and V: unless the conformance target of V is more narrowly defined - for example it declares the domain of V:P to be V:C1  and S:C is not a subclass of V:C1.  in this case the profile relaxes the constraints in V, and hence it is not a profile of V: . 

</text>

In the context the conformance target of dublin core RDF vocabulary is any resource expressed

I suspect we can do better wording here - but given concern over the grey areas around reuse of vocabularies we need to be explicit and provide guidance about how deep dependencies need to be declared.





Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/527 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 1 November 2018 03:31:09 UTC