Sections 1.5 and 3: Add text addressing why schema versioning is not needed in addition to namespace versioning/maintenance

XMLWordPrintable

    • Type: Improvement
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Priority: Major
    • None
    • Affects Version/s: wd30
    • Component/s: spec
    • None
    • Environment:

      William Cox

    • Hide

      Add a sentence to Section 3 near line 344: "Namespace maintenance as described in section 1.5 addresses also addresses the need for schema versioning; we do not specify versions beyond those required by the namespace maintenance policy."

      Also eliminate ", in effect,"

      Show
      Add a sentence to Section 3 near line 344: "Namespace maintenance as described in section 1.5 addresses also addresses the need for schema versioning; we do not specify versions beyond those required by the namespace maintenance policy." Also eliminate ", in effect,"
    • Hide

      Add a sentence to Section 3 near line 344: "Namespace maintenance as described in section 1.5 addresses also addresses the need for schema versioning; we do not specify versions beyond those required by the namespace maintenance policy."

      Also eliminate ", in effect,"

      Show
      Add a sentence to Section 3 near line 344: "Namespace maintenance as described in section 1.5 addresses also addresses the need for schema versioning; we do not specify versions beyond those required by the namespace maintenance policy." Also eliminate ", in effect,"

      Independent of namespace maintenance issues (see EMIX-317) versioning the schema (by adding a schemaVersion attribute to major class definitions) has been discussed. There are pluses and minuses with respect to the EMIX information model.

      Pluses include identification of versions of major artifacts; minuses include overhead for management, of versioning, space in each artifact for the version, and that schemaVersion in addition to namespace versioning and maintenance is a "belt and suspenders" approach.

      With a number of relatively small objects, the overhead seems a real burden, for little value.

      Mixing artifacts from different namespace versions seems a recipe for confusion among those using the standard – incremental update of an EMIX implementation is not something I would anticipate.

      NOTE line number inserted for wd30

            Assignee:
            Toby Considine (Inactive)
            Reporter:
            William Cox (Inactive)
            Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: