On 14/04/2014 13:42, martin wrote:
Dear All,
Here a proposed explanation to the release policy of CRM-SIG:
a) Draft releases are published to indicate to users which changes
are upcoming.
On one side, this should provide more trust in the stability
of the rest of the constructs, even though non-backwards
compatible changes
are very rare. Mostly, we add new properties, generalize domains
or ranges,
or change scope notes.
On the other side, this is to encourage users which do have a
mapping problem
the new constructs will solve to use them right away.
We us to publish draft releases when we regard that new concepts are
accepted,
whereasdetails of scope notes are yet to be settled.
Therefore RDFS versions of draft releases are encouraged to be used.
In order for this policy to be of practical value, we will need a
working mechanism which allows users to specify in their Linked Data
URLs which version of the CRM RDFS they mean, with a fallback approach
which always gives them the current official release. I made
suggestions towards such a mechanism, in recent correspondence with
Martin and Christos.
b) An official release is a form with scope notes and concepts in a
consistent state.
There is no policy of when a new release is to be made. New constructs are
entered on a request & evidence base.
Presumably, by definition there will only be one official release at any
one time, with previous official releases becoming "superseded"
releases? Each version of the CRM should be self-documenting as regards
its release status, ideally specifying date of release, etc.
Richard
c) Normally, any set of new concepts introduced should result in a
second order change
of version number. (5.0 - 5.1 etc.).
d) A change of scope notes, introduction or generalization of property
range should
result in a third order change of version number. (5.0.1 - 5.0.2
etc.).
d) A change of practical scope or modelling principle should result in
a first order change.
I believe that FRBRoo should soon provide a stable release of RDFS. I
suggest to
regard the current definition (result of the Den Haag Meeting) of
FRBRoo should
be regarded as "official" in RDFS, regardless of the publishing policy
of IFLA wrt
minor editorial changes, which has blocked publication so far.
I suggest to produce an official FRBRoo 2.0 in RDFS by May 15, 2014.
Best,
Martin
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 |
Research Director | Fax:+30(2810)391638 |
| Email:[email protected] |
|
Center for Cultural Informatics |
Information Systems Laboratory |
Institute of Computer Science |
Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH) |
|
N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, |
GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece |
|
Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl |
--------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
*Richard Light*
