search

uncefact / spec-untp

UN Transparency Protocol
https://uncefact.github.io/spec-untp/
GNU General Public License v3.0
18 stars 18 forks source link

Should the UNTP allow third parties redefining spec related vocabulary #116

Closed PatStLouis closed 4 months ago

PatStLouis commented 5 months ago

Should we protect terms defined by this specification? The UNTP defines some terms such as ConformityAttestation. Do we want to allow third parties redefining what a ConformityAttestation (or any other vocabulary defined in this specification) means in their UNTP credentials with an arbitrary definition?

@nissimsan @zachzeus @onthebreeze @ashleythedeveloper

Fak3 commented 5 months ago

We should protect core classes like ConformityAttestation at the root context. But only protect properties in the type-scoped or property-scoped subcontexts, to allow downstream extensions developers freedom to redefine generic properties like scope within the subcontext of their own custom defined classes.

PatStLouis commented 4 months ago

It seems we have agreement that UNTP defined types and scoped properties should be defined. I will close this issue if no further comments are made.

onthebreeze commented 4 months ago

Agreed - all UNTP terms now protected