RFC-2 revision 1

[normanrz]

First, I would like to thank the reviewers of RFC-2 for their constructive feedback!

This PR incorporates the feedback from the reviewers in the RFC. The main changes are:

• Disallowing mixing of Zarr v2 and v3 as well as multiple OME-Zarr versions for images and hierarchies to avoid conflicts
• Changing the namespace back to ome and re-adding a version attribute
• Strongly encouraging implementations to continue to support 0.4 because vast quantities of data exist
• Clarifications about the state of implementations (although that is a moving target)

I updated the spec changes in #242.

There is a larger issue about versioning and backwards compatibility that I don't want to solve as part of this RFC. However, I wrote a blog post on image.sc to capture my current thoughts on the topic.

[github-actions[bot]]

Automated Review URLs

• Readthedocs
• render latest/index.bs
• diff latest modified

[joshmoore]

@normanrz : as @will-moore mentioned in https://github.com/ome/ome-ngff-validator/pull/36, would it be possible for us to get temporary but resolvable URLs for this? either 5.0-dev2 or doing everything relatively?

[imagesc-bot]

This pull request has been mentioned on Image.sc Forum. There might be relevant details there:

https://forum.image.sc/t/ome2024-ngff-challenge/97363/15

[will-moore]

@normanrz @joshmoore I remembered that I tried this with the transformations work that also used separate schemas and I had this working by proactively loading the schemas (see https://github.com/ome/ome-ngff-validator/pull/32/files#diff-3274f1a37032fb0ae4e2823def0007c634e869ae0dfc304ff6a12c36513c3a52R172), so I'll give that a try now...

EDIT - it worked 👍

[joshmoore]

Thanks to everyone for the clarification comments. Merging and sending to reviewers for feedback. As with other PRs, if anyone else would like to submit a more extended review, please send (or open in a PR) a new markdown file following the style of the other files in https://github.com/ome/ngff/tree/main/rfc/2.