[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emix] Hot Topic: Namespaces and Versioning
I tend to prefer YYYY/MM in the namespace to denote version. From: William Cox [mailto:wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com] Detailed thoughts below. This follows the W3 conventions quite well (except where they seem to think that there is one version per year). William Cox
We have yet to deal completely with Schema and namespace versioning. One approach would look like the following: NO. Has the problem that it assumes one version per year. Table 1‑1: XML Namespaces in this standard
An alternate approach would look like YES with the changes shown - adding /06 to each. There is an issue about the subnamespaces (thinking in URI-speak) as to whether they would have their own Namespace document or a copy of that for the top; it's also been suggested that in parallel, the first namespace should end with "emix/" -- since the overall namespace is emix, I don't think that's needed. Table 1‑1: XML Namespaces in this standard
Still another, which we seem to have adopted implicitly is NO. Need year/data in the namespace, unless it's perfect and we'll never ever have another version :-) Table 1‑1: XML Namespaces in this standard
There are then the various approaches which summarize as “putting v1.0 in place of the 2011 in alternates (1) and (2) This is confusing similar to but not identical to the similar issue of persistence of artifacts. In general, I recommend that we remain consistent with W3C Guidelines which are oft-quoted as follows: <xs:annotation> <xs:documentation>In keeping with the XML Schema WG's standard versioning policy, this schema document will persist at http://www.w3.org/2005/08/xml.xsd. At the date of issue it can also be found at http://www.w3.org/2001/xml.xsd. The schema document at that URI may however change in the future, in order to remain compatible with the latest version of XML Schema itself, or with the XML namespace itself. In other words, if the XML Schema or XML namespaces change, the version of this document at http://www.w3.org/2001/xml.xsd will change accordingly; the version at http://www.w3.org/2005/08/xml.xsd will not change. </xs:documentation> </xs:annotation> This would result in a statement as follows: In keeping with the XML Schema WG's standard versioning policy, the schemas defined in this specification will persist in http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/emix/2011/06/. At the date of issue, each can also be found at http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/emix/2011/. The schema documents at that URI may however change in the future, in order to remain compatible with the latest version of EMIX Specification. In other words, if the schemas namespaces change, the version of these document at http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/emix/2011/ will change accordingly; the versions at http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/emix/2011/06/ will not change. I don't like this at all. Then if we do 1.1 in September, then does 2011 get updated? This seems to lead to confusion. Seems very bad to have that be the case.. “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]