`observable:AlternateDataStream` is not a subclass of `FileSystemObject`, but `File` and `ReparsePoint` are

[ajnelson-nist]

Bug description

These lines in UCO 1.3.0 designate AlternateDataStream as a "top-level" class under ObservableObject. However, the rdfs:comment definition scopes the concept to being specific to NTFS files (and hence NTFS file systems).

It seems AlternateDataStream should be moved under observable:FileSystemObject.

Steps to reproduce

See disparity between AlternateDataStream and, e.g., ReparsePoint, another NTFS-specific file system object.

Coordination

• Tracking in Jira ticket OCUCO-316

• Administrative review completed, proposal announced to Ontology Committees (OCs) on 2024-02-08
• Requirements development phase skipped - proposal fast-tracked.
• Solution form to be discussed in OC meeting, 2024-02-15
• Solution announced to OCs on 2024-05-10
• Solutions Approval to be discussed in OC meeting, 2024-05-30
• Solutions Approval vote occurred, passing, on 2024-05-30
• Solutions development phase completed.
• Backwards-compatible implementation merged into develop for the next release
• develop state with backwards-compatible implementation merged into develop-2.0.0
• Backwards-incompatible implementation merged into develop-2.0.0
• Milestone linked
• Documentation logged in pending release page
• Prerelease publication: CASE develop branch updated to track UCO's updated develop branch
• Prerelease publication: CASE develop-2.0.0 branch updated to track UCO's updated develop-2.0.0 branch

[ajnelson-nist]

I think the right thing to do here is:

• In UCO 2.0.0, change the superclass.
• In UCO 1.4.0, issue a SHACL warning if an AlternateDataStream object is not multi-typed as a FileSystemObject (i.e., a "soft" notice that the class hierarchy is changing in UCO 2.0.0).

[sbarnum]

I concur with this proposal and the suggested approach for 2.0.0 and 1.4.0 in the above comment.