Official 1.1 release?

[matentzn]

We have been using the 1.1 draft standard for a while now in https://github.com/mapping-commons/sssom/releases/tag/v1.1.0a3 and our tools;

Since no major requests came in in the last 4 months or so, I am wondering what people think of an official 1.1. release of the spec.

Is there anything missing we would absolutely want in there?

[gouttegd]

Just from the top of my mind, the issues that IMHO should be tackled for a 1.1 release:

• Make mapping_tool* slots multi-valued? #491
• Misleading specification of multi-valued slots in SSSOM/TSV #429
• Change license element to support CURIEs, e.g., for SPDX #399

I would also love to have a real specification for the SSSOM/JSON serialisation format (#321), but given the time it took to do that for SSSOM/RDF we might not want to wait for that before we release SSSOM 1.1.

[gouttegd]

we might not want to wait for [a real specification of SSSOM/JSON] before we release SSSOM 1.1.

I don’t think this should be a big deal because if/when we finally have the time to tackle the JSON specification, there shouldn’t be any need to update the model.

For the SSSOM/RDF serialisation, this was different because we needed to add the record_id slot, which was needed for the way we wanted to represent mappings in RDF.

But for the SSSOM/JSON serialisation, I can’t think of any model update (adding a new slot or a new enum value, changing the definition of an existing slot) that we would need in order to define how to represent mappings in JSON.

Therefore, I think it should be perfectly fine to release 1.1 as it is (without a formal JSON spec), and to add the JSON spec afterwards – the addition of the JSON spec will not be a new version of SSSOM.

[cthoyt]

ready for this?

[matentzn]

@cthoyt give me a bit of time - I am currently working on the JSON and JSON-LD specifications and it is taking me a bit of time. I think we can be ready for a mid May release of 1.1, and can have as many RCs as your want on the way there.

@gouttegd I know we said "it is not necessary", but I feel motivated.

[gouttegd]

I am currently working on the JSON and JSON-LD specifications and it is taking me a bit of time. I think we can be ready for a mid May release of 1.1

We currently don’t even have the beginning of a spec for either JSON or JSON-LD, and you think we can get to the point where both are fully specified by mid-May?

That seems wildly optimistic to me, but well, if you are motivated… :D

[cthoyt]

I would appreciate a RC! Then we can get rid of the blasted linkml deprecation warnings 😁