Home » railML newsgroups » railml.common » [railML3] Additional Attributes for Revision Management (file management (file-docID, file-version,file content status, file checksum))
Re: [railML3] Additional Attributes for Revision Management [message #3326 is a reply to message #2475] Fri, 20 September 2024 15:53 Go to previous message
Thomas Nygreen is currently offline  Thomas Nygreen
Messages: 89
Registered: March 2008
Member
Dear all,

We are trying to resolve this in railML 3.3.

I would welcome more input on current practices and demand for file versions. Karl Jerosch originally suggested a specific format (00.00, ..., 99.99), while Michael Gruschwitz suggested a less strict format. There are many different practices when versioning files, and a lack of formal standards. More well-defined versioning systems intended for software systems, such as Semantic Versioning, are designed for software, not for files. Although numbering using one or two

Dublin Core does not offer any version number propery. Dublin Core itself is not versioned by number, but by date, and this seems to be the recommended practice. In addition to the dc:date property that we already have, the extended term set from Dublin Core that we currently aim to include with railML 3.3. includes specific properties for dates of when the resource (i.e. file) was created, modified, submitted, accepted and issued (as well as a couple more date and period properties). It also includes the properties hasVersion and isVersionOf that can be used to reference subsequent and previous versions of the current file, as well as replaces and isReplacedBy that can be used to reference a resource (such as another version) that the current file replaces or is replaced by. For a complete list of the Dublin Core term set, please refer to [1].

Would the Dublin Core approach of versioning files using dates be sufficient for your use cases, or do you need some kind of version number? If you do need a version number, how do you use this in a way that is not covered by using dates, and does the number need to follow any specific pattern?

Best regards,
Thomas

[1] https://www.dublincore.org/specifications/dublin-core/dcmi-t erms/


Thomas Nygreen – Common Schema Coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [railML3] Request for feedback on changes of our deprecation policy
Next Topic: [railML3] Refactoring of states (e.g. infrastructure states)
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Apr 20 17:13:40 CEST 2025