Skip to content

Upwards compatibility of versions #261

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
afs merged 1 commit into from
Jan 15, 2026
Merged

Upwards compatibility of versions #261

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
19 changes: 16 additions & 3 deletions spec/index.html
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -791,9 +791,22 @@ <h3>Version Labels</h3>
</tbody>
</table>

<p>For serializations supporting in-line version announcement,
<p>
Data conforming to version "1.1" is valid as data with version "1.2-basic",
and data conforming to version "1.2-basic" is valid as data with version "1.2".
Data conforming to version "1.1" has the same semantics
under [[[RDF11-MT]]] and under [[[RDF12-SEMANTICS]]].
</p>

<p>
See [[[RDF-INTEROP]]] for details of encoding "1.2" as "1.2-basic".
</p>

<p>
For serializations supporting in-line version announcement,
the version announcement SHOULD be made early in the document
and certainly before serializing any feature depending on that version.</p>
and certainly before serializing any feature depending on that version.
</p>

<section id="server-considerations" class="informative">
<h4>Server Considerations</h4>
Expand All @@ -802,7 +815,7 @@ <h4>Server Considerations</h4>

<ol>
<li>Eliminate <a>triple terms</a> by using an algorithm such
as <i>basic encoding</i> as defined in [[RDF-INTEROP]] (downgrading from version "1.2" to "1.2-basic").
as <i>basic encoding</i> as defined in [[[RDF-INTEROP]]] (downgrading from version "1.2" to "1.2-basic").
Copy link
Contributor Author

@afs afs Dec 18, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@pchampin - change to appearance here.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@afs afs Dec 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@pchampin - non-blocking aside:

I could not find RDF11-SEMANTICS in specRef. RDF-SEMANTICS is described as an alias of RDF11-MT.
But isn't RDF-* supposed to be the current spec? If so, when (!) RDF 1.2 is published, things may slip.

Copy link
Contributor

@pchampin pchampin Dec 19, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • rdf-* always points to the latest REC, hence to 1.1 for the moment
  • rdf11-semantics is an alias in w3.org/TR/, which was created for regularity,
    but its "real" name is rdf11-mt, which is how specref knows it
  • (likewise, rdf11-turtle is not recognized by specref, you need to call it turtle)

</li>
<li>Replace <a>directional language-tagged strings</a>
by <a>literals</a> with a <a>datatype IRI</a> that
Expand Down
Loading