You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In #11 we are working on a new format for RDF Patch. This is not a direct extension of the Jelly serialization format, but it does use some protos from that.
There may be more such formats building on top of the core format in the future. The question is how should we version them.
I still have to think this through, but here some notes on how it may work. Here "Jelly-RDF" stands for the Jelly serialization format. "Jelly-X" is a hypothetical new format building on top of it (like Jelly-Patch).
Jelly-RDF MINOR bump -> Jelly-X MINOR bump
What happens if the Jelly-RDF change is irrelevant to Jelly-X? For example, it's just a change in the metadata. Then the bump makes no sense.
Jelly-X MINOR bump -> nothing
Which means that Jelly-RDF and Jelly-X should not be tied 1:1
...thinking required.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Ostrzyciel
changed the title
New specs based on the Jelly serialization format and versioning
Versioning of new specs based on the Jelly serialization format
Feb 18, 2025
In #11 we are working on a new format for RDF Patch. This is not a direct extension of the Jelly serialization format, but it does use some protos from that.
There may be more such formats building on top of the core format in the future. The question is how should we version them.
I still have to think this through, but here some notes on how it may work. Here "Jelly-RDF" stands for the Jelly serialization format. "Jelly-X" is a hypothetical new format building on top of it (like Jelly-Patch).
...thinking required.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: