W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-wg@w3.org > April 2007

citing GRDDL test cases normatively Re: @@'s in editor's draft

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:35:44 -0500
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1177392944.9528.179.camel@dirk>

On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:29 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> 
> Here are some suggestions concerning the @@'s in editor's draft.
> $Date: 2007/04/18 14:54:08 $
> $Revision: 1.250 $
> http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec

Thanks; I these helped a lot with my TODO list.

I think this suggestion, which I followed, is
particularly worth noting:

> @@cite GRDDL test cases?
> ==============
> 
> Yes, as a normative ref. With the following text linking to it.
> 
> Under
> Preface and Companion Documents
> 
> add
> [[
> <h4 id="intro_testcases">GRDDL Test Cases</h4>
> 
> <p>The GRDDL Test Cases<a class="norm" href="#testcases">[testcases]</a>
> provides a collection of tests illustrating this specification.
> Some of the tests may help clarify the intended
> reading of the normative text.</p>
> ]]

A normative citation on the test cases blows
away the possibility of doing a CR on the spec
while the test cases are in last call.

(I discovered this while trying to update
the detailed schedule
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/sched7  ).

But it seems like The Right Thing.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2007 05:35:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:49 GMT