Conformance class URIs during development

[cportele]

In ldproxy we usually set the version number of conformance class URIs to "0.0" instead of "1.0" until the standard has been published. We want to avoid that a client that implements a standard thinks that an API implements the published standard, but the API really implements some draft.

For the Tiles conformance classes I had to (temporarily) change this now to "1.0" because this is what the draft ETS expects, but this can only lead to problems in the future.

I think we need an approach how we use versions in conformance class URI for standards that have not been published.

[ghobona]

Day 3 of 2021-05 Sprint short stand up session feedback

This will help with client applications too.

Centralised version control and management during development (prior to version 1.0) will help during code sprints.

We need something to indicate that "this is a draft" prior to version 1.0.

Three digit numbers might not be appropriate, especially if different implementors have implemented different minor versions.

Action: @ghobona to draft up a document describing an approach (for trying out at a future sprint).