- From: Michael A Squillace <masquill@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:08:14 -0500
- To: public-wai-ert@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF657F618F.32EA79AF-ON852575DE.004CD6EC-862575DE.004DA9E9@us.ibm.com>
> Clarification: My comments were not directly about the requirements > document, but about versioning of our docs in general. I only stimbled > about it when reading the requirement doc's abstract. Understood. > Hmm. What's the version then for the Schema document (the core of EARL)? > The schema document would then be titled > "EARL 1.0 Schema 1.0"? :-) For now, its version is 1.0 and its title is EARL Schema 1.0. > Let's say, currently we have > "EARL 1.0 Schema" version 1.0 > "Content-in-RDF" version 1.0 > ... > in summa: EARL (the vocabulary) 1.0 > Now, only Content-in-RDF gets updated to version 1.1. Would that make > EARL (the vocabulary) also go to version 1.1? How then would the schema > document be titled? "EARL 1.1 Schema 1.0"? Precisely, except that the title of the core schema is still EARL Schema 1.0. The other option, of course, is to not version the vocabulary itself at all and version only the schema. This seems misleading, though, since the vocabulary is indeed made up of multiple specifications and, therefore, would change if one of the specs changed. I'm not sure what W3C guidelines about versioning come into play here. Will look into this before tomorrow's call. --> Mike Squillace IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center W:512.286.8694 M:512.970.0066 External: http://www.ibm.com/able Internal: http://w3.ibm.com/able Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fi t.fraunhofer.de> To Sent by: public-wai-ert@w3.org public-wai-ert-re cc quest@w3.org Subject Versioning of EARL docs (was: Minor 06/23/2009 08:52 updates to requirements document) AM Clarification: My comments were not directly about the requirements document, but about versioning of our docs in general. I only stimbled about it when reading the requirement doc's abstract. Michael A Squillace schrieb: >> EARL 1.0 Schema. Is it the schema document (the core) for the 1.0 >> version of EARL? Or the 1.0 version of EARL Schema? > It's the version of the entire suite of vocabularies. Hmm. What's the version then for the Schema document (the core of EARL)? > The requirements > document applies to the vocabulary, which we agreed was defined over > multiple specs. Yes, I don't object that. >> Do we also want to version e.g. Content-in-RDF? >> What if Content-in-RDF gets a new version number, say 1.1. Would that >> make EARL the vocabulary version 1.1, even if EARL Schema is not changed? > Good point. My own view is that all of the documents should be versioned The schema document would then be titled "EARL 1.0 Schema 1.0"? :-) > and that, when one changes, the version of the suite changes. The suite is > not defined entirely in terms of the core vocabulary (i.e. the schema) nor > should the version be defined in that way. Let's say, currently we have "EARL 1.0 Schema" version 1.0 "Content-in-RDF" version 1.0 ... in summa: EARL (the vocabulary) 1.0 Now, only Content-in-RDF gets updated to version 1.1. Would that make EARL (the vocabulary) also go to version 1.1? How then would the schema document be titled? "EARL 1.1 Schema 1.0"? -- Johannes Koch Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology FIT Web Compliance Center Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany Phone: +49-2241-142628 Fax: +49-2241-142065
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: graycol.gif
- image/gif attachment: pic27948.gif
- image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif
Received on Tuesday, 23 June 2009 14:09:00 UTC