Vocabulary definitions need not be formal or published depending on usage.

[handrews]

Fixes #1058. I think there is agreement on this? It was faster to write a PR than ping the issue. I'm not attached to this wording if folks prefer something else.

[karenetheridge]

I'd like to add that the URI used to represent the vocabulary (in the $vocabulary keyword) SHOULD resolve to a document (not a schema, but any sort of plain text document that describes the vocabulary - ranging from a freeform README right up to a formal specification), that need not be publicly be resolvable, but SHOULD be resolvable in the context where it is intended to be used -- for example, if a company develops a vocabulary for its private use, then the vocabulary URI need not be publicly available, but SHOULD be available on its own private network as a description of that vocabulary. Note "SHOULD" not "MUST" -- this is just a recommended best practice but there may be reasons why it can't be done in all circumstances.

I think this was the intent, as discussed earlier, but it never made it into the spec.

[handrews]

@karenetheridge

I'd like to add that the URI used to represent the vocabulary (in the $vocabulary keyword) SHOULD resolve to a document (not a schema, but

That's outside the scope of this PR, although you're welcome to file an issue for it. The sort of wording you propose was discussed and rejected. I don't recall why (or even what side I was on), but the place to sort that out is in a new issue.

[karenetheridge]

Ok, I created #1105.