W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > May 2011

Re: publication infrastructure / respec

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 14:17:44 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTik0j9-_VHAXuSdrhE3mF_N3geqoZw@mail.gmail.com>
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:42 GMT