Versioning

[Matthew Graham]

Hi,

This is a discussion that I started within my WG just to solicit  
opinion. Can the Standards WG please clarify:

The response was posted to my comments on the RFC page:

"The Committee agrees that the version numbering scheme is challenging  
when dealing with namespaces and WSDL, and leads to the conclusion  
that when IVOA standards describe web services or have associated XML  
schemas, with namespaces that when changed, cause software to break,  
then these changes must both be accompanied by an increment to the  
integer part of the document and the associated "supplementary" files.  
This would not affect most of the standards documents, and should not  
present any real logistical difficulty, as there are a sufficient  
number of integers available to support any number of revisions. "

I explain:

This has greatest impact for this working group (GWS but I am also  
cross-posting to Semantics)  and essentially means that ALL (WD, PR,  
etc) versions of our specs with WSDL/XML/RDF documents (anything with  
a namespace) will only carry integer versions.

So, for example, the progression of VOSpace 2.0 would actually proceed  
as:

VOSpace 2 (first WD)
VOSpace 3 (second WD)
VOSpace 4 (third WD)
VOSpace 5 (first PR)
VOSpace 6 (second PR)
VOSpace 7 (final PR)
VOSpace 8 (REC)

The next version would then VOSpace 9, etc.

Is this a valid interpretation of the spec?

The standards documents says:

"The number to the left of the (first) decimal point starts with 0 for  
documents that are being discussed within a Working Group prior to  
publication for IVOA-wide review.  The number increments to 1 for the  
first public version, and to 2, 3, ..., for subsequent versions that  
are not backward compatible and/or require substantial revisions to  
implementations."

The definition of a Working Draft is:

"A Working Draft is published at the discretion of a Working Group  
once the WG is satisfied that the document is sufficiently developed  
to merit broader exposure and feedback"

So I think that a Working Draft fulfils the "IVOA-wide review"  
criterion.

The alternate suggestion from Dave Morris and with much support is:

If the integer rule only applied to something that has been accepted  
as a recommendation.

VOSpace 2.0-yyymmdd (first WD)
VOSpace 2.0-yyymmdd (second WD)
VOSpace 2.0-yyymmdd (third WD)
VOSpace 2.0-yyymmdd (first PR)
VOSpace 2.0-yyymmdd (second PR)
VOSpace 2.0-yyymmdd (final PR)
VOSpace 2.0 (REC)

VOSpace 2.1-yyymmdd (first WD) (minor text changes only)
VOSpace 2.1-yyymmdd (final PR) (minor text changes only)
VOSpace 2.1 (REC)

VOSpace 3.0-yyymmdd (first WD) (changes to service behavior or xml  
schema)
...

I think this needs to be clarified one way or the other.

	Cheers,

	Matthew