Published schema for OpenVex

[garethr]

The specification is a good human readable document, but it's not machine readable.

It would be useful to have a standalone schema (for instance in JSON Schema) for the specification. This would:

• Allow for standalone validation
• Make strong schema versioning easier to reason about
• Avoid some ambiguity in any human readable document like the current spec
• Aid in building tools that implement the spec, including additional libraries beyond the Go implementation

Thoughts?

[luhring]

Great idea!

[puerco]

I have a draft of the schema and context but I have not pr'ed them yet because I'm waiting for the VEX document to get finalized. At least frozen.

[dlorenc]

I have a draft of the schema and context but I have not pr'ed them yet because I'm waiting for the VEX document to get finalized. At least frozen.

Seem safe to PR it at least!

[tschmidtb51]

Just a word of caution: A schema, even though it's a good start, won't be enough to ensure that OpenVEX documents are valid VEX documents - see the discussion in #19. You might need to check that the encapsulation document has the products listed...

[jspeed-meyers]

@puerco, what happened to the draft of the schema and context? Did you already PR it and it just wasn't linked to this issue? In other words ( 😄 ), has this issue already been addressed and so can be closed?

[aamedina]

Would there be any interest in an RDF model for OpenVEX?

[aamedina]

Here is an experimental OWL ontology with links to SPDX 3 profiles if anyone cares to import it into Protege use the spdx ontologies in the resources/spdx folder https://github.com/aamedina/ssvc/blob/eec287d86e4021ba6b5fe642eed05f987283bdd4/resources/vex/openvex.ttl

[puerco]

@aamedina if there is a need, go for it! We will be updating the spec next week, so it should be based on that revision. Let's chat about it on the community call!