W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > April 2017

Re: Version Control

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:02:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CAK-qy=555HgoWYechF+J--Q5UJ95fH6oYarP=s23QQxEfTRQtg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
On 11 April 2017 at 18:46, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
> How is version control handled?

We have numbered releases (with occasional minor hot fixes in between)
- see http://schema.org/docs/releases.html. For fine-grained detail
there are github commit IDs. If you want a document to indicate a
dated release that it uses, you can use
http://schema.org/schemaVersion . At Github we could (and will) make
better use of tags for releases etc.


p.s. Regarding signing, in the foaf project ~15 years ago (and
somewhere in http://lists.foaf-project.org/pipermail/foaf-dev/ I
guess) we used to carefully GPG sign the schema/spec with each
release, but it never really found much use so we stopped doing it.
Even when you fix some things rigidly with crypto, there are always
squishy human aspects where you'll find semantic drift e.g. reference
by description ("President Bush") or definitions whose community
understanding shifts even if the formal definition text doesn't (e.g.
schoolHomepage, which evokes a slightly different idea amongst EN-US
vs EN-UK speakers).

> Within the Verifiable Claims works[1] ontology is used in a verifiable
> claim, which is then signed[2]; yet the question becomes, what happens if
> the ontological definition changes?  in theory, this may change the concept
> signed as a 'claim' by changing the definition of the URIs involved.?
> CONCEPT:  Add version control somehow.
> not sure how.
> Tim.H.
> [1]
> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pFGC1G7CbizUuvbmjECfnNRL4fZk9QLxG8d3nehgwNU/edit#slide=id.p
> [2] http://json-ld.org/playground/
Received on Tuesday, 11 April 2017 17:03:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:12:35 UTC