live, the universe, and versioning [was: In defence of 404 ...]

On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 23:36 +0200, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> Yes, something similar to what OWL uses for its own purpose
> (owl:priorVersion) would be nice. It would also be interesting to attach
> a date to a data set.

> This seems to be a rather generic issue. Are you aware of anything that
> we could borrow for this kind of issues?

The TAG has taken up a related issue:

 XMLVersioning-41: What are good practices for designing extensible XML
languages and for handling versioning?

We just had another interesting discussion of it today.

Dave Orchard is working on a finding
  [Editorial Draft] Extending and Versioning Languages Part 1

It includes some UML diagrams that I have converted to OWL
with XSLT. I need to review this 26 July draft and update
my OWL stuff, but you might be interested in a little
item I wrote up back in February...

 Using RDF and OWL to model language evolution
 Submitted by connolly on Wed, 2006-02-15


This is all very much work in progress. You're more than
welcome to take a look.

Actually, the more relevant bit might be a 30 Sep message
references from that Feb weblog item...

formally defining W3C's namespace change policy options w.r.t. recent
TAG versioning terminology

Wow... I see a version of changePolicy.n3 on local disk here
that's not checked in... I sure hope for time to swap this
all in and get more organized.

Dan Connolly, W3C
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Tuesday, 8 August 2006 22:10:04 UTC