HI -1 for an immediate change
I would suggest something like * add SKOS04 * add SKOS08 (mainly for documentation purpose * pint the current SKOS to SKOS08 * deprecate both SKOS and SKOS08 after the next release I suggest * remove SKOS * keep the deprecated SKOS08 after the next (current +2) release * add SKOS (using the 2004 namespace) * deprecate SKOS04 (as users should use SKOS instead) * keep the deprecated SKOS08 (mainly for documentation purpose) this allows to migrate to the correct SKOS namespace in a reasonable timeframe without the danger of breaking user applications (unless the skip an whole version) best Rupert On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Hasan <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear All, > > after studying the arguments provided by Reto and Tsuy, I must admit that > for the sake of > compliance to standards, we should change the SKOS namespace back to the > one accepted > by W3C. > > However, I wonder if there is a mechanism to support existing users who > want to upgrade their > clerezza instance wihtout having to change their codes (means changing the > import statements > and all occurances of SKOS to SKOS08 in java program codes). > Note that the change to SKOS class breaks existing codes (a software cannot > fulfil its functionality). > Since Clerezza is not intended to be used exclusively, but as a base for > developing other functionality > by our community members, we should take care that community members who > are currently using > Clerezza, will not be affected (if possible) if they would merely upgrade > their Clerezza platform. > > I don't know whether using packageinfo (for versioning) can avoid or at > least mitigate this problem. > I am thinking of simply specifying the package version of rdf.ontologies to > be imported by community members' projects. > I'd suggest to investigate this and other possibilities before making > changes to SKOS namespace. > > Thus -1 for the time being > > Kind regards > Hasan > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Tsuy Ito <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > What happens if in future another version will be defined as namespace of >> > SKOS? You will update it again and all users have to change their code, >> > again? not very user-friendly. >> > >> Your argument about user friendlyness seems a bit starnge. How can it be >> user friendly is in clerezza "SKOS" refers to a namespace that was only >> temporarily proposed and never accepted and not to the namespace that is >> and has been the standard across different all the different released >> versions of the spec. >> >> The W3C has decided not to change the namespace, its only Clerezza that >> adopted a proposed namespace change that was never accepted. So the SKOS >> namespace is the old http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core# one and users >> rightfully expect the clerezza constants to refer to this. >> >> >> > >> > Especially because user who uses snapshot versions will not notice the >> > change (build will not break) but this change will have a big impact on >> the >> > existing data. So they have to update their database or update their >> source >> > code. >> > >> Well, in a productive context a user should only change to a SNAPSHOT >> version id this brings significant needed improvements. Here the only >> improvemnet is exactly the resolution of CLEREZZA-717 is it asking to much >> that somebody depending on the current bug either not to update or change >> its code to use the SKOS08 class? >> >> Cheers, >> Reto >> >> >> > >> > There is no technical reason for my -1 but I suggest do it the other way >> > arround to be more user-friendly. >> > >> > >> > -1 >> > >> > cheers >> > tsuy >> > >> > >> > On Sep 6, 2012, at 11:50 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > After checking the spec again I can confirm what Rupert wrote >> > > >> > > The august 28 2008 version used the >> > > http://www.w3.org/2008/05/skos#namespace [1] but the final version of >> > > the spec of August 28 2009 defines >> > > http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core# to be the namespace [2]. >> > > >> > > Therefore I vote >> > > >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > Reto >> > > >> > > 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-skos-reference-20080829/#L1302 >> > > 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#vocab >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > >> As there doesn't seem to be a consensus on the discussed namespace >> > change >> > >> I ask for a vote on the resolution I propose for CLEREZZA-717. My >> > proposed >> > >> resolution can be seen here: >> > >> >> > >> >> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/clerezza/issues/CLEREZZA-717/ >> > >> >> > >> See >> > >> >> > >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-clerezza-dev/201209.mbox/%3ccalvhuevo5vu1+pqr_mjwsttwwcevrxeq-1y7apq0yuggb9x...@mail.gmail.com%3Eforthediscussion >> thread. >> > >> >> > >> The vote will be open for at least 72h >> > >> >> > >> Please note that vetoes (-1) need a technical reason to be valid. >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > --trialox ag------------------------------------- >> > tsuyoshi ito >> > hardturmstrasse 101 >> > 8005 zuerich >> > >> > >> -- | Rupert Westenthaler [email protected] | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 | A-5500 Bischofshofen
