- From: Simon Cox via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2018 21:44:23 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
I think I agree with @rob-metalinkage 's aversion to a specific typology. As soon as you do that an additional case will appear that does not quite fit. However, some enumeration of styles of conformance is helpful. The OGC work that we did 10 years ago emerged slightly uneasily from two underlying ideas: 1. Core and Extensions - a small footprint core to which additional capabilities are added 2. Constraints over a very generic model. The idea to focus on requirements and tests seemed to be the only rigorous way to address this. And then the idea to packages groups of requirements and tests into 'conformance classes' was a principled yet pragmatic way to tame the resulting combinatorial explosion and concomitant challenge to interoperability. The conformance patterns that @smrgeoinfo describes above cover both these drivers. -- GitHub Notification of comment by dr-shorthair Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/486#issuecomment-435197855 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 1 November 2018 21:44:25 UTC