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

Re: rdftest namespace documents

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:34:05 -0800
Message-Id: <0E66AE36-6206-490F-9F80-944D8BEEF2CA@greggkellogg.net>
Cc: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Feb 19, 2014, at 1:02 AM, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote:
> 
> On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 1:29 AM, Gregg Kellogg
>> 
>> I created the rdftest namespace documents [1] [2] [3], which is
>> referenced from the RDF 1.1 Test Cases, and the test manifests. The
>> Turtle and and JSON-LD versions are created from the HTML+RDFa, so we
>> should be completely consistent. These files should go in
>> http://www.w3.org/ns/ and content-negotiate to the appropriate version.
>> 
>> It would be good to have some extra eyes on this to be sure I haven't
>> left anything out or made some other inadvertent error.
> 
> The title of the document is wrong. It says "The JSON-LD Vocabulary".

Thanks.

> If the
> HTML has been created manually, we should consider re-ordering the classes.
> Currently, rdft:TestEval sits there alone above a couple of ...Syntax
> classes. Perhaps using nested lists would help to visualize the class
> hierarchy!?

It started in the same arbitrary order as RDF 1.1 Test Cases, but are now in alphabetical order. Hard to say which is best. Nesting would separate syntax from evaluation (and approval), which might make alphabetizing more natural; I could try that.

Gregg

> Other than that, it LGTM.
> 
> 
>> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/ns/rdftest.html
>> [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/ns/rdftest.jsonld
>> [3] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/ns/rdftest.ttl
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 15:34:36 UTC

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