TAPRegExt erratum, Identifiers for Obscore

[Mark Taylor]

On Wed, 11 Dec 2013, Paul Harrison wrote:

> 
> On 2013-12 -11, at 07:28, Markus Demleitner <msdemlei at ari.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
> 
> > Bob,
> > 
> > [fixing an IVORN in an example]
> > 
> > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:45:56PM +0000, Robert J. Hanisch wrote:
> >> I think it would be more consistent with the versioning system we have
> >> been using for nearly 10 years to make an incremental (0.01 delta) release
> >> of the document, note the errors that have been corrected in the change
> >> log, and fix the problem in the main document.  If people don't bother to
> >> look at the change log / erratum they will go on implementing the wrong
> >> thing.
> > 
> 
> The way that I understand section 1.2 of http://www.ivoa.net/documents/DocStd/20100413/REC-DocStd-1.2.pdf - the 1.x number refers to the version of the underlying protocol so for simple typographic style changes that do not change the intended functionality of the described protocol/model etc., the “1.x number” part of the document does not change, but merely the date. In this way there are none of the consequent issues that you outlined.
> 
> Ironically REC-DocStd-1.2.pdf does not follow its own recommendation, but for instance http://www.ivoa.net/documents/VODataService/20101202/REC-VODataService-1.1-20101202.pdf does  by formally including the date as part of the document file name.

You're missing this paragraph:

   The final published and approved Recommendation retains the date
   on the title page of the document, but the date is removed from the
   document filename in order to simplify reference to the document.

Document names for REC documents, unlike those for other stages in the
process, do not contain dates.

--
Mark Taylor   Astronomical Programmer   Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bris.ac.uk +44-117-9288776  http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/