Skip to Content
Last modified by Artur K. on 2026/05/29 14:28
From version 1.3
edited by Helena K.
on 2026/01/15 15:05
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 1.9
edited by Helena K.
on 2026/01/15 15:12
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
35 35  
36 36  The criterion for deciding which component is impacted is the severity of the change, i.e. the possibility of maintaining backward and forward compatibility between the different versions of an artefact.
37 37  
38 -==== a. Description of backward/forward compatibility ====
38 +== a. Description of backward/forward compatibility ==
39 39  
40 40  Backward compatibility is defined as: An item (e.g. a data message) that was produced and validated with the previous version of an artefact (e.g. a DSD) can still be successfully validated using the newest version of the same artefact. For example, a data message produced and validated with a DSD version 1.1 is still valid against the same DSD (same id and Agency) upgraded to version 1.2.
41 41  
... ... @@ -47,71 +47,64 @@
47 47  * MINOR version when changes are backward but not forward compatible;
48 48  * PATCH version when minor changes (e.g. text clarifications, correction of typos) are both backward and forward compatible.
49 49  
50 -**// //**b. Cost-benefit analysis for a major version change
50 +== **// //**b. Cost-benefit analysis for a major version change ==
51 51  
52 52  The cost of imposing a “major” change should be balanced against the benefit of retaining backward compatibility, for example by not deleting codes used in existing data exchanges or by deleting or replacing codes only through a concerted effort of all data exchange partners.
53 53  
54 -| |**//c. Synthesis based on the above syntax and criterion//**|
55 -|(% colspan="2" %)**Change SeverityVersion ImpactDescription**|**Example**
56 -|(% colspan="2" %)**Major +.0 Neither** backward **nor** forward compatibility|**1.2 2.0**
57 -|(% colspan="2" %)**Minor N.+ **Backward **but not** forward compatibility|**1.0 1.1**
58 -|(% colspan="2" %)**Patch N.M.+ **Backward **and** forward compatibility|**1.2 1.2.1**
54 +== c. Synthesis based on the above syntax and criterion ==
59 59  
56 +|(% colspan="2" %)**Change Severity**|**Version Impact**|**Description**|**Example**
57 +|(% colspan="2" %)**Major**|**+.0**|__**Neither**__ backward __**nor**__ forward compatibility|**1.2 **→**2.0**
58 +|(% colspan="2" %)**Minor**|**N.+**|Backward __**but not**__ forward compatibility|**1.0 **→**1.1**
59 +|(% colspan="2" %)**Patch**|**N.M.+**|Backward __**and**__ forward compatibility|**1.2 1.**→**2.1**
60 +
60 60  === 4. Types of artefact changes and their versioning impact ===
61 61  
62 62  As a general rule insignificant changes (e.g. textual clarifications or typos) will result in an increment of the patch component of the versioning system (i.e. N.M.**+**).
63 63  
64 -| |(% colspan="2" %)**CODE LIST (CL)**
65 -|**Type of Change**|**Impact**|**Comments**
66 -|(((
65 +|(% colspan="3" %)**CODE LIST (CL)**
66 +|(% style="width:877px" %)**Type of Change**|(% style="width:161px" %)**Impact**|(% style="width:1034px" %)**Comments**
67 +|(% style="width:877px" %)(((
67 67  **Addition into an existing CL of one or more new codes not having the**
68 68  
69 69  **CodeList:Code:ParentCode attribute**
70 -)))|**Minor**: **N.,,+,,**^^({{footnote}}The overall impact on compatibility should be assessed when there are several “minor” version impact changes. For example, it may be that the effect of adding several new Code List or HCL codes results in an implicit change in the meaning of existing Code List or HCL codes which may not be completely backward compatible, therefore (depending on the analysis) the overall version impact may be “Major +.0”.{{/footnote}})^^|Data exchanged/disseminated using the old CL can still be exchanged/disseminated using the new CL
71 -|(((
71 +)))|(% style="width:161px" %)**Minor**: **N.,,+,,**^^({{footnote}}The overall impact on compatibility should be assessed when there are several “minor” version impact changes. For example, it may be that the effect of adding several new Code List or HCL codes results in an implicit change in the meaning of existing Code List or HCL codes which may not be completely backward compatible, therefore (depending on the analysis) the overall version impact may be “Major +.0”.{{/footnote}})^^|(% style="width:1034px" %)Data exchanged/disseminated using the old CL can still be exchanged/disseminated using the new CL
72 +|(% style="width:877px" %)(((
72 72  **Addition of one or more new hierarchies represented using the**
73 73  
74 74  **CodeList:Code:ParentCode attribute (not using the Hierarchical Code List artefact)**
75 -)))|**Minor**: **N.,,+,,^^(^^**^^3)^^|Data exchanged/disseminated using the old CL can still be exchanged/disseminated using the new CL as already existing hierarchies still represent the same aggregations
76 -|**Addition of one or more new codes into existing hierarchies represented using the CodeList:Code:ParentCode attribute (not using the Hierarchical Code List artefact)**|**Major**: **+.0**|After the change, the parent code for the changed hierarchy does not represent the same aggregation any more, thus resulting in a break in backward compatibility
77 -|**Aggregation, disaggregation, reorganisation or removal of one or more codes**|**Major**: **+.0**|Data exchanged/disseminated using an old version of the CL can no longer be exchanged/disseminated using the new version of the CL
76 +)))|(% style="width:161px" %)**Minor**: **N.,,+,,^^(^^**^^{{footnote}}The overall impact on compatibility should be assessed when there are several “minor” version impact changes. For example, it may be that the effect of adding several new Code List or HCL codes results in an implicit change in the meaning of existing Code List or HCL codes which may not be completely backward compatible, therefore (depending on the analysis) the overall version impact may be “Major +.0”.{{/footnote}})^^|(% style="width:1034px" %)Data exchanged/disseminated using the old CL can still be exchanged/disseminated using the new CL as already existing hierarchies still represent the same aggregations
77 +|(% style="width:877px" %)**Addition of one or more new codes into existing hierarchies represented using the CodeList:Code:ParentCode attribute (not using the Hierarchical Code List artefact)**|(% style="width:161px" %)**Major**: **+.0**|(% style="width:1034px" %)After the change, the parent code for the changed hierarchy does not represent the same aggregation any more, thus resulting in a break in backward compatibility
78 +|(% style="width:877px" %)**Aggregation, disaggregation, reorganisation or removal of one or more codes**|(% style="width:161px" %)**Major**: **+.0**|(% style="width:1034px" %)Data exchanged/disseminated using an old version of the CL can no longer be exchanged/disseminated using the new version of the CL
78 78  
79 79  
80 80  
81 81  |(% colspan="3" %)**HIERARCHICAL CODE LIST (HCL)**
82 -|**Type of Change**|**Impact**|**Comments**
83 +|**Type of Change**|(% style="width:150px" %)**Impact**|(% style="width:1045px" %)**Comments**
83 83  |(((
84 -**Addition of new hierarchies in the HCL.**
85 +**Addition of new hierarchies in the HCL. Existing hierarchies are unaffected**
86 +)))|(% style="width:150px" %)**Minor**: **N.,,+,,**^^({{footnote}}The overall impact on compatibility should be assessed when there are several “minor” version impact changes. For example, it may be that the effect of adding several new Code List or HCL codes results in an implicit change in the meaning of existing Code List or HCL codes which may not be completely backward compatible, therefore (depending on the analysis) the overall version impact may be “Major +.0”.{{/footnote}})^^|(% style="width:1045px" %)Data represented using the old HCL can still be represented using the new HCL
87 +|**Addition of codes into existing hierarchies in the HCL. Existing hierarchies are thus affected**|(% style="width:150px" %)**Major**: **+.0**|(% style="width:1045px" %)The HCL resulting from this change does not represent the same aggregation any more, thus breaking backward compatibility
88 +|**Removal of one or more codes in the HCL or removal of one or more codes in the referenced code lists**|(% style="width:150px" %)**Major**: **+.0**|(% style="width:1045px" %)Data represented using the old HCL can no longer be represented using the new HCL, thus resulting in a break in backward compatibility
89 +|**Addition, modification or removal of one or more hierarchical levels**|(% style="width:150px" %)**Major: +.0**|(% style="width:1045px" %)The reorganisation of codes within hierarchies has a significant impact on the code aggregations
85 85  
86 -**Existing hierarchies are unaffected**
87 -)))|**Minor**: **N.,,+,,**^^(3)^^|Data represented using the old HCL can still be represented using the new HCL
88 -|**Addition of codes into existing hierarchies in the HCL. Existing hierarchies are thus affected**|**Major**: **+.0**|The HCL resulting from this change does not represent the same aggregation any more, thus breaking backward compatibility
89 -|**Removal of one or more codes in the HCL or removal of one or more codes in the referenced code lists**|**Major**: **+.0**|Data represented using the old HCL can no longer be represented using the new HCL, thus resulting in a break in backward compatibility
90 -|**Addition, modification or removal of one or more hierarchical levels**|**Major: +.0**|The reorganisation of codes within hierarchies has a significant impact on the code aggregations
91 -
92 -
93 -
94 94  |(% colspan="3" %)**CONCEPT SCHEME (CS)**
95 -|**Type of change**|**Impact**|**Comments**
96 -|**Addition of one or more new concepts in an existing CS**|**Minor**: **N.+**|(((
97 -Data exchanged/disseminated using the old version of the
98 -
99 -CS can still be exchanged/disseminated using the new CS
92 +|(% style="width:874px" %)**Type of change**|(% style="width:154px" %)**Impact**|(% style="width:1044px" %)**Comments**
93 +|(% style="width:874px" %)**Addition of one or more new concepts in an existing CS**|(% style="width:154px" %)**Minor**: **N.+**|(% style="width:1044px" %)(((
94 +Data exchanged/disseminated using the old version of the CS can still be exchanged/disseminated using the new CS
100 100  )))
101 -|**Removal of one or more existing concepts**|**Major: +.0**|Data exchanged/disseminated using the old version of the CS can no longer be exchanged/disseminated using the new version with less concepts
96 +|(% style="width:874px" %)**Removal of one or more existing concepts**|(% style="width:154px" %)**Major: +.0**|(% style="width:1044px" %)Data exchanged/disseminated using the old version of the CS can no longer be exchanged/disseminated using the new version with less concepts
102 102  
103 -
104 -
105 105  |(% colspan="3" %)**DATA STRUCTURE DEFINITION (DSD)**
106 -|**Type of change**|**Impact**|**Comments**
107 -|**Addition of a dimension**|**Major**: **+.0**|Adding a new dimension has a strong impact because a dimension represents the identifier of a dataset, thus requiring a remodelling of the data as existing structural validation will fail
108 -|**Addition of a mandatory attribute**|**Major**: **+.0**|If the attribute is mandatory, the situation is the same as under point “Addition of a dimension”
109 -|**Addition of a conditional attribute**|**Minor**: **N.+**|If the attribute is conditional backward compatibility is maintained
110 -|**Removal of a dimension or attribute**|**Major**: **+.0**|Whatever the type of component, the change does not guarantee backward compatibility
99 +|(% style="width:868px" %)**Type of change**|(% style="width:159px" %)**Impact**|(% style="width:1045px" %)**Comments**
100 +|(% style="width:868px" %)**Addition of a dimension**|(% style="width:159px" %)**Major**: **+.0**|(% style="width:1045px" %)Adding a new dimension has a strong impact because a dimension represents the identifier of a dataset, thus requiring a remodelling of the data as existing structural validation will fail
101 +|(% style="width:868px" %)**Addition of a mandatory attribute**|(% style="width:159px" %)**Major**: **+.0**|(% style="width:1045px" %)If the attribute is mandatory, the situation is the same as under point “Addition of a dimension”
102 +|(% style="width:868px" %)**Addition of a conditional attribute**|(% style="width:159px" %)**Minor**: **N.+**|(% style="width:1045px" %)If the attribute is conditional backward compatibility is maintained
103 +|(% style="width:868px" %)**Removal of a dimension or attribute**|(% style="width:159px" %)**Major**: **+.0**|(% style="width:1045px" %)Whatever the type of component, the change does not guarantee backward compatibility
111 111  
112 112  For concrete examples, see the Appendix.
113 113  
114 -=== 5. How versioning works for inter-dependent artefacts ===
107 += 5. How versioning works for inter-dependent artefacts =
115 115  
116 116  This section describes how version changes to inter-dependent or parent/child artefacts affect each other. For example, how a Concept Scheme is affected when one of the Code Lists that it references changes version.
117 117  
... ... @@ -134,26 +134,19 @@
134 134  The replacement of a reference with a different reference has the same impact for every artefact.
135 135  
136 136  |(% colspan="3" %)**ALL ARTEFACTS**
137 -|**Type of change**|**Impact**|**Comments**
138 -|(((
139 -**Replacement of a child artefact having a different version, but same id and**
140 -
141 -**Agency**
130 +|(% style="width:492px" %)**Type of change**|(% style="width:441px" %)**Impact**|**Comments**
131 +|(% style="width:492px" %)(((
132 +**Replacement of a child artefact having a different version, but same id and Agency**
133 +)))|(% style="width:441px" %)(((
134 +**The child artefact version change is replicated in the parent artefact**
142 142  )))|(((
143 -**The child artefact version change is replicated in the**
144 -
145 -**parent artefact**
146 -)))|(((
147 147  If a child artefact (e.g. a Code List) has a minor version change, then the parent artefact (e.g. a Concept Scheme) should also have a minor version change.
148 -
149 149  If there are several child artefact version changes, the most severe impact is replicated in the parent artefact. For example, if two Code Lists have minor changes, and one Code List has a major change at the same time, the parent Concept Scheme has a major version change
150 150  )))
151 -|(((
152 -**Replacement of a referenced child artefact having a**
139 +|(% style="width:492px" %)(((
140 +**Replacement of a referenced child artefact having a different id or Agency**
141 +)))|(% style="width:441px" %)**The parent artefact version impact depends on the backward/ forward compatibility as shown in the tables above**|Technically, the child artefact is not considered to be related to the previous child artefact. It needs to be checked whether exchange contracts can still be guaranteed (backward/forward compatibility principle)
153 153  
154 -**different id or Agency**
155 -)))|**The parent artefact version impact depends on the backward/ forward compatibility as shown in the tables above**|Technically, the child artefact is not considered to be related to the previous child artefact. It needs to be checked whether exchange contracts can still be guaranteed (backward/forward compatibility principle)
156 -
157 157  ==== b. Addition or removal of referenced artefacts ====
158 158  
159 159  | |(% colspan="2" %)**CONCEPT SCHEME (CS)**
© Semantic R&D Group, 2026