Should the UNTP allow third parties redefining spec related vocabulary

uncefact / spec-untp

UN Transparency Protocol

https://uncefact.github.io/spec-untp/

GNU General Public License v3.0

10 stars 9 forks source link

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

Open PatStLouis opened 4 days ago

PatStLouis commented 4 days 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 2 days 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.