Re: [dxwg] Including adms:identifier in class descriptions (#761)

@riccardoAlbertoni , +1 to check with @draggett .

However, my take is that we are not prevented from using "officially standard" vocabularies, provided that there's a versioning policy in place ensuring that the vocabulary won't disappear, and it won't be changed without taking into account existing implementations.

Although ADMS is not a Recommendation, the W3C preservation policy prevents it from disappearing or even changing URL or namespace URI. Moreover, changing the vocabulary itself would require chartering a new Working Group, who should take into account existing implementations, etc.

So, I think we can safely re-use ADMS terms in normative sections - and they same should apply for DQV and DUV.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by andrea-perego
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/761#issuecomment-465339586 using your GitHub account

Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2019 22:36:39 UTC