Re: [dxwg] property profileOfTransitive

I am strongly not in favour of creating a formal typology of profiles - I have seen how much pain, confusion and fruitless debate even two levels in the ISO typology of profiles causes. 

If a single conceptual model is able to handle all the cases, then lets keep it simple unless we have a driving requirement that cannot be met with that model - for example some restriction that types of profiles need to express that need users to have provided an explicit statement of type, that cannot be directly inferred trivially from the available properties.

To introduce a typology we would need:
1) driving Use Cases
2) worked examples
3) someone willing to do all the work of modelling, documenting and illustrating 
4) a significant debate and proof these things are indeed disjoint.. or at least different enough to be interesting

for example 
isType3ProfileOf -- if A isType3ProfileOf B, then instances of A meet ALL requirements in B, and A adds additional requirements from other specifications that are not incompatible with B.

is actually the simple case:

A isType1ProfileOf B,C,...

and "requirements" that do not have mandatory cardinality (in the case of information schemas) can be met by absence, so "ALL" is easily met - and if you do not meet requirements you are simply not a valid profile.

At this stage "partial conformance" is out of scope - profiles support the simple case. 
IMHO its a separate (and difficult) piece of work to work out what a partial conformance statement would mean in a Web context - its difficult to see any useful role beyond making documentation a little easier - "this thing is a bit like one of these"







-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/486#issuecomment-435183213 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 1 November 2018 20:52:58 UTC