On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 10:32 AM Sean Barnum <sbar...@mitre.org> wrote:
> I would agree with 2, 3, 4 & 5 below but would take exception with 1. > > > > Based on my perspective of use cases and the extensive discussions we have > had in the past I would disagree with two aspects of this assertion > > 1. A collection of Elements all defined within the same namespace is > not inherently or inferentially a “Document”. Namespaces are not always > tied to Documents. They could be organization-driven, use-case-driven, etc. > As such a collection of Elements may exist in the same namespace and there > are no Documents involved at all. > 2. The Elements contained within a given Document do not have to share > the same namespace. A Document can contain/convey Elements defined within a > variety of namespaces. > > In the current model under discussion, the only property of a Document is a namespace. So, your above assertions don't make sense to me. While I agree, you can refer to elements in other namespaces, within the same document, it has to be an explicit act, through use of an external document ref / external map functionality. Kate > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#4125): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/4125 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/84484456/21656 Group Owner: spdx-tech+ow...@lists.spdx.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
