create label spec:new-feature, and add reference to class-X in the relevant label descriptions

[ghurlbot]

Opened by gkellogg via IRC channel #rdf-star on irc.w3.org

Due: 2024-11-28 (Thursday 28 November)

[gkellogg]

Discussed adding "class-1" through "class-4" labels, as well.

[pchampin]

@rdfguy @ktk @gkellogg @afs seems to me that the ms:future-work label is a good fit for that. It is present on all of our REC-track repos.

[pchampin]

@gkellogg re. class-1 through class-4 labels, two remarks:

• should we name them spec:class-1, spec:class-2... for homogeneity with existing labels?
• should we then deprecate some of the existing spec: labels?
  spec:editorial would be specialized by class-1 and class-2,
  spec:sutstantive by class-3 and class-4,
  spec:bug is essentially class-3...

[afs]

@rdfguy @ktk @gkellogg @afs seems to me that the ms:future-work label is a good fit for that. It is present on all of our REC-track repos.

Ah - I missed that one.

[gkellogg]

Yes, ms:future-work is a good label to use. I think that spec:editorial, and such probably have better intuitive meanings than spec:class-2. But, we probably want something that has more meaning than spec:substantive or spec:bug to better distinguish between class-3 and class-4 changes.

[pchampin]

Yes, ms:future-work is a good label to use. I think that spec:editorial, and such probably have better intuitive meanings than spec:class-2. But, we probably want something that has more meaning than spec:substantive or spec:bug to better distinguish between class-3 and class-4 changes.

I propose to add spec:new-feature, and to add references to "class 1", "class 2"... in the documentation strongs of spec:editorial (class 1 or 2), spec:substantive (restricting it to class 3, pointing to spec:new-feature for class 4), spec:bug (class 3) and spec:new-feature (class 4).