Move vocabs to gh-pages, version them

[dmitrizagidulin]

1. Version the relevant included vocabularies
2. Move the main branch to gh-pages, so they can be easily accessible from github.io

[csarven]

I'm not sure I completely understand the intention of this issue.

This repository was intended for us to discuss, understand, and improve the vocabularies that can be used by the Solid platform and applications. Whatever and wherever the vocabularies are originally, they'll continue to be served from there. I don't think versioning vocabularies is a good idea either.

[dmitrizagidulin]

Ah, I'm specifically talking about vocabularies that are hosted in this repo (like https://github.com/solid/vocab/blob/master/solid-terms.ttl ).
Those should be moved to the gh-pages branch, so we can actually have working links to them in our RDF

[dmitrizagidulin]

And as far as versioning, SemVer-like versioning for schemas and vocabs can be really helpful to developers (see http://snowplowanalytics.com/blog/2014/05/13/introducing-schemaver-for-semantic-versioning-of-schemas/ )

[csarven]

Good practice to include provenance information about the modifications eg. when a term gets added to the vocabulary, it can specify issue date, status, creator, relation to specification/documentation etc. However, creating a new URI namespace for each version creates fragmentation and raises the bar for reuse eg. http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#sec-evolution .

[dmitrizagidulin]

@csarven I very much wish everybody would stop using that FOAF post as a reason not to version schemas. :) One, it was wrong to begin with. Two, things are very different these days. We have Semantic Versioning, and we version our specs and schemas.

For example, both the DID working group and the verifiable credential groups are both intending to version their contexts / vocabularies. (And would go so far as to hash-lock to a particular context).