W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > February 2014

Re: RDF 1.1 Test Cases

From: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 11:02:11 +0100
Message-ID: <52FC9823.4040602@vu.nl>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
CC: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>


On 12-02-14 22:12, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> The document is updated, and I saved a draft to <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/drafts/rdf11-testcases/Overview.html>.
>
> The PubRules checker finds issues, but it seems reasonable to me:
>
> * Markup saved as HTML5, which I believe is okay, but this generates an error.
> * Want's style sheet be be W3C-WD, but it's W3C-NOTE.
> * Want's status to have W3C Working Draft, but has W3C Note.
> * No Previous Version link.
> * ...
>
> There are more. I'm not sure that notes need to pass pubrules; let me know if there's something that needs to be done for this to pass cleanly.

Notes do need to pass pubrules. I edited the ReSpec attributes a bit and 
removed the "Prtevious version" link manually from the static version 
[1], and now it passes pubrules (well, there is a HTML error).

The inclusion of a "Previous version" looks like a ReSpec bug. I'll let 
them know.

Guus

[1] 
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/REC-drafts/NOTE-rdf11-testcases-20140225/Overview.html




>
> Gregg Kellogg
> gregg@greggkellogg.net
>
>
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 10:02:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:19 UTC