Remove the "Ecommerce" prefixing

[OR13]

The vocab is for supply chain... we don't need "Ecommerce" prefixed everywhere.. and it makes things less reusable.

[Therecanbeonlyone1969]

@OR13 ... happy to do that if we can standardize on the things that are must requirements for e-commerce which is currently represented in the VCs and evidence documents.

[OR13]

@Therecanbeonlyone1969 it might be worth taking some whole cohort time to discuss evidence in VCs, and generalization of vocab when we get our next chance.... ping @bumblefudge

[mprorock]

Agreed. Good topic for discussion. I think there is a place for prefixing, but we should standardize when and where, and add to readme

…

On Mon, Mar 1, 2021, 09:44 Orie Steele ***@***.***> wrote: @Therecanbeonlyone1969 <https://github.com/Therecanbeonlyone1969> it might be worth taking some whole cohort time to discuss evidence in VCs, and generalization of vocab when we get our next chance.... ping @bumblefudge <https://github.com/bumblefudge> — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#113 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA2VJZEEWCCXRXGJKINCWODTBOR4PANCNFSM4XZG6QGQ> .

[bumblefudge]

Does "whole cohort" mean supply chain traceability subcohort or SVIP-wide cohort?

I think it might also be a topic for a CCG community call or DIF Interop WG, as I would be curious to poll implementers if there are best practices or conventions that might help?

[OR13]

^ yeah, larger crowd....

[OR13]

@Therecanbeonlyone1969 any chance you can tackle this cleanup?

[Therecanbeonlyone1969]

@OR13 yup ... will do a PR. What do we do for Orders and Invoices? We have conflicting schemas there. Wanna get on a call with interesting ppl and hash it out? cc @mprorock @bumblefudge

[OR13]

If we remove prefixes, then we need a base template, for shareable types and extensions.... blocked by base types?

[OR13]

blocked by #162

[OR13]

Proposal to add base types and removing prefixes in a single PR.

[TallTed]

I agree that we don't need "Ecommerce" prefixed everywhere, because it does make things less reusable.

However, I don't believe that this (provenance-focused) vocab will only be used for supply chain, which I believe goes against the conversation in and around #153, even if that's the current intent or, I think more accurately, current focus, with broadened focus anticipated in future.

[OR13]

I think we can safely remove the prefix, without discussing other issues.

[OR13]

If there exist no conflict, remove the prefix.

if there exists a conflict, raise a separate issue.

[mprorock]

Per call: Can be revisted post YAML conversion now

[OR13]

we also have an issue with the evidence property. I suggest we just do our best to. simplify as much as we can.

[OR13]

@BenjaminMoe can you take a stab at this.

[BenjaminMoe]

Yep! On it!

[BenjaminMoe]

Addressed in #368