- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 14:17:44 +0200
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 12 May 2011 14:00, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:
> On 29 Apr 2011, at 13:51, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> So, I think the real questions are:
>>
>> 1. Version control: CVS, Mercurial, or Wiki?
>
> Git. In a pinch, Mercurial.
W3C's systems team already agonised over that, and flipped a W3C-wide
coin: they chose Mercurial.
http://www.w3.org/blog/systeam/2010/06/16/why_we_chose_mercurial_as_our_dvcs/
My heart sinks a bit at learning another similar-but-different set of
distributed versioning commands, but I think it'll be ok.
Can we have a Mercurial repo? Just needs Sandro/Ivan to mail sysreq
with chosen name ("rdfwg'?). Plus a little discipline from us on what
we do there...
>> 2. Authoring format: Mediawiki markup, or HTML5-with-<sections>. This
>> includes how the bibliography is done.
>
> HTML5.
I'd like to stick to an XML-friendly subset if we can. Most of HTML5
is in the Javascript APIs anyway, ... don't imagine we'll be using
those?
(or maybe we should embed a query engine in the primer?
http://www.w3.org/1999/11/11-WWWProposal/rdfqdemo.html )
Dan
Received on Thursday, 12 May 2011 12:18:15 UTC