- From: Riccardo Albertoni via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2022 23:18:37 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
We discussed this issue and the PR #1451 in tonight call. We agreed that PR #1451 addresses the core of this issue "version should not be limited to numbers" replacing the current definition of <code>dcat:version</code> >The version number of a resource [[?PAV]]. with >The version indicator (name or identifier) of a resource` Resolution https://www.w3.org/2022/02/08-dxwgdcat-minutes.html#r03 summarizes the result of tonight discussion on the argument that we shouldn't use 'version' to define 'version'. The proposal is to keep "version" as using the word version in the normative part leaves open to other kinds of versions than revisions. And at this stage, we do not want to restrict the ontological commitment without full evidence that version = revision . Does this sound reasonable to @agreiner and @kcoyle? -- GitHub Notification of comment by riccardoAlbertoni Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1442#issuecomment-1033158236 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2022 23:18:40 UTC