https://wiki.spdx.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Technical_Team%2FMinutes%2F2017-09-12 2026-05-07T12:25:42Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.23.13 https://wiki.spdx.org/index.php?title=Technical_Team/Minutes/2017-09-12&diff=4457&oldid=prev 2017-09-12T18:13:02Z

<p>Created page with &quot;Sept. 12, 2017 == Attendees == * Gary O’Neall * Kate Stewart * Uday Shankar * Thomas Steenbergen * Alexios Zavras == Views on SPDX Documents == * Discussed the SPDX documen...&quot;</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>Sept. 12, 2017<br /> == Attendees ==<br /> * Gary O’Neall<br /> * Kate Stewart<br /> * Uday Shankar<br /> * Thomas Steenbergen<br /> * Alexios Zavras<br /> <br /> == Views on SPDX Documents ==<br /> * Discussed the SPDX document views. <br /> * See the “Thomas: Add data “views” to the specification “topic in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vJqWGU02ynzrJ5CvmX1z2mBssOSpuBvuKene8jVJGNI for details on this and previous discussions on the topic<br /> * Agreed on the call to have the views be a separate enhancement from the profiles<br /> * Left open two possible proposals for discussion next week:<br /> ** Create a new document type “SpdxViewDocument” which has a mandatory reference to the detailed SPDX document. All other fields are the same as an SPDX document except they are optional.<br /> *** Pros: Easy to identify a view document, can easily specify the mandatory and optional fields in the RDF Schema<br /> *** Cons: Would duplicate the SPDX document schema and create some maintenance challenges for the spec.<br /> ** Add a relationship “SpdxDocumentViewOf” which would apply at the document level. If this relationship is present, only the document level properties would be mandatory.<br /> *** Pros: Simple addition to the spec<br /> *** Cons: Mandatory fields could not be specified in the RDF Schema since it is conditional on the presence of a relationship<br /> <br /> [[Category:Technical|Minutes]]<br /> [[Category:Minutes]]</div>

Goneall