W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > December 2015

Re: Pre-publication steps

From: Riccardo Albertoni <albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 21:08:37 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOHhXmQ7iKra_4PJ2MztxZ7=FzDJGzHt4WMRns+b5O3A7VMVRw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Cc: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Hi Phil,
Thanks for the instructions,
I think DQV is almost ready with the Pre-publication steps.
You can find the html generated by ReSpec at

Still some issues are found by PubRules,
but sincerely I am not sure  how to fix them,
any suggestion?

 if you need more details on the steps we did you can see below.


On 11 December 2015 at 18:10, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:

> Riccardo, Eric, Newton,
> I think it's the three of you who are doing most work to prepare the docs
> for publication (with luck, Eric, we can vote next week to publish the DUV
> immediately after Christmas ;-) )
> Before publication there are a number of steps that need to be followed. I
> am happy to take on some of this as your team contact, however, I will be
> travelling Monday-Tuesday and so time is tight. Our webmaster is expecting
> a raft of publications on Thursday and so we need to be prepared.
> The order of these steps is not important but here's a list:
> 1. Spelling needs to be checked. Please run the text through a spell
> checker set to US English (warning- Europeans write 'organisation,'
> Americans write 'organization' etc.)

> 2. Weird thing about W3C, we give the word Web a capital W (when it refers
> to the WWW).

3. HTML must be valid. The validator is at https://validator.w3.org.
> Warnings are OK, actual errors are not. The most common errors are
> unclosed elements, or extra closing elements that don't match an opening
> one etc. As discussed, the <section> elements are what drives the ToC and
> numbering.
> It is valid,

> Also, all links must resolve, so use the link checker too
> http://validator.w3.org/checklink
> It has a habit of reporting some URLs as unavailable but when you try them
> in the browser, they're fine. If this happens it's because the check sends
> an HTTP HEAD request, not a GET - and some servers are set up not to
> respond to HEAD requests.

I have got rid of most of the  invalid links,
we have still few  links which are marked as broken,
I would not consider those links as  problematic:
They  are "broken URI fragments" which  are either  links to classes/
properties we are still in progress in DQV (for which we use   <a
href="#">... </a> ), or pointers to a class or propriety in a RDF file
(e.g., http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#DatatypeProperty).
If you need more detail, you can take a look at

> 4. Note that ReSpec does a lot of the work for you - and it does do a
> *lot* of work. For example, it writes in ids for every section and every
> heading that doesn't already have one. It also adds in RDFa markup and Web
> ARIA info. That's why the published docs have far more markup than you put
> in. If you copy and paste *from* a published doc, it will have all that in
> there and it won't do any harm, but it may surprise you to see it :-)
> 5. Thanks for including the change logs - they're important.
> I have added  the changes history also under the section "Changes:" in the
document header.

> 6. The ReSpec config is important of course. This is what writes in all
> the top matter. If you look at the source code of view-source:
> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html you'll
> see all the config options, including the section on 'otherLinks'. That's
> where you can put the links to the GH repo, the Diff etc.
> Sorry but I am not adding GH repo. After publishing the  DQV FPWD, we had
at least a commenter complaining  that he could not raise issues on
github.. So we decided to remove the GH repo to avoid to   cause confusion
to people who wanted raise issue.

> 7. The diff! ReSpec even does that for you. Click the reSpec icon on the
> top right of the doc and choose to save. You'll see various options, one of
> which is to save the diff - and voila - you have a diff marked doc you can
> save. It refers to the URL you defined as the previous version.

I have added the diff link.
 Not sure how understandable it is but anyway we have it :)
The dump of diff is in the subdirectory diffs/ .

> Then if you really want to finish the job there is our PubRules checker
> https://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules This checks for many things, most of
> which are handled by ReSpec, but not all. Documents that don't pass
> PubRules won't be published.
> You can do all this. The only thing you can't do is to install the
> documents on w3.org which I will do of course. The more of this you're
> able to do, the more chance there is of us meeting the deadline.
> The documents need to be installed and PubRules on Wednesday. And I need
> to send a publication request to the webmaster.
You can find the html generated by ReSpec at

> I'll do my best to help between now and then of course. I'll be in a 2 day
> project meeting and so will have some ability to tune out from time to time.
> Phil.
> --
> Phil Archer
> W3C Data Activity Lead
> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
> http://philarcher.org
> +44 (0)7887 767755
> @philarcher1
> --
> This message has been scanned by E.F.A. Project and is believed to be
> clean.

Riccardo Albertoni
Istituto per la Matematica Applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche "Enrico
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
via de Marini 6 - 16149 GENOVA - ITALIA
tel. +39-010-6475624 - fax +39-010-6475660
e-mail: Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it
Skype: callto://riccardoalbertoni/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni
www: http://www.ge.imati.cnr.it/Albertoni
Received on Monday, 14 December 2015 20:09:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 14 December 2015 20:09:05 UTC