W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > October 2008

Re: [Recipes] Open issues in Recipes

From: Diego Berrueta Muñoz <diego.berrueta@fundacionctic.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 11:37:37 +0200
Cc: Thomas Baker <baker@sub.uni-goettingen.de>
Message-Id: <D0922D58-AD1C-4DE7-93FB-544E18C8C0DE@fundacionctic.org>
To: SWD Working Group <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

I've closed ISSUE-16, ISSUE-17, ISSUE-18, ISSUE-19, ISSUE-20,  
ISSUE-21, ISSUE-22, ISSUE-23 and ISSUE-58 as per resolution in our  
last telecon.

In all cases, I've added a note to the issue tracker with:
* A link to my message of Oct, 4 with the list of issues and suggested  
reactions [1].
* A link to the resolution to close these issues in the minutes of  
last telecon [2].
* A link to the specific section of the Recipes where the issue was  
addressed.

With respect to ISSUE-18 (QA Review), in which Ralph was particularly  
interested, I've updated the wiki [3] with a detailed description of  
the changes made to the Recipes in response to Karl's comments.

Diego.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0067.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#item03
[3] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/BestPracticeRecipesIssues/QaReviewSummary

El 04/10/2008, a las 16:08, Diego Berrueta Muñoz escribió:

>
> Hi Tom. This is the list of the issues, their current status, and  
> the action I suggest for each one, to be discussed next Tuesday:
>
> * ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/16 
> ) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: close the issue. There used to be an action  
> about this issue that was dropped on 10 Jun, 2008, when the WG  
> decided to advance recipes to Note.
>
> * ISSUE-17 "Recipe 6 is incomplete" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/17 
> ) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: close the issue (solved). The Note includes a  
> complete Recipe 6.
>
> * ISSUE-18 "QA Review comments from Karl Dubost" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/18 
> ) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action:  close the issue (solved). The Note addresses  
> all the comments from Karl (I'm not sure, however, if we contacted  
> back with Karl about these changes).
>
> * ISSUE-19 "Recipes should supply a general server configuration  
> template" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/19) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: close the issue (solved). The Note contains a  
> link to a wiki page that invites uses to contribute their  
> configurations for non-Apache servers.
>
> * ISSUE-20 "Online server testing" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/20 
> ) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: close the issue (solved). The Note contains a  
> link to Vapour, an online validation service.
>
> * ISSUE-21 "Apache configuration should add that mod_rewrite must be  
> loaded and enabled" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/21)  
> -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: close the issue (solved). The Note contains  
> explicit instructions to load mod_rewrite.
>
> * ISSUE-22 "Questioning reference to 'IE6 hack'" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/22 
> ) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: close the issue (solved). The section on IE6  
> in the Note was rewritten.
>
> * ISSUE-23 "	There should be some discussion of alternatives  
> to .htaccess" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/23) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: close the issue (solved). Appendix D of the  
> Note discusses the alternatives.
>
> * ISSUE-24 "Additional text explaining redirect choices in the  
> recipes" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/24) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: to be discussed
>
> * ISSUE-30 "Determine how and if RDDL relates to the Recipes" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/30 
> ) -- RAISED
>  ==> Suggested action: to be discussed
>
> * ISSUE-58: ".htaccess 'accept header' ONLY responds to a header  
> which EXACTLY matches " (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/ 
> 58) -- OPEN
> ==> Suggested action: close the issue. The document acknowledges the  
> problem and provides hints on how to tackle it.
>
> * ISSUE-60 "Guidelines needed for proper construction of vocabulary  
> scheme and 'term' URIs" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/ 
> 60) -- RAISED
>  ==> Suggested action: to be discussed. IMO, discussing the strategy  
> to pick URIs for new terms is out of the scope of the document.
>
> * ISSUE-98 "URI escaping in SPARQL query in Recipe 6" (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/98 
> ) -- RAISED
> ==> Suggested action: to be discussed.
>
> Best,
>
> El 04/10/2008, a las 11:06, Thomas Baker escribió:
>
>>
>> In the issue tracker, ten of the eleven "open" issues [1]
>> relate to "Recipes" as well as three of the "raised" issues [2].
>> Almost all of the issues date from early 2007.
>>
>> I am putting these on the agenda for Tuesday.  Could the
>> editors please look into this so we can clean up the record?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/open
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/raised
>>
>> -- 
>> Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
>>
>
> --
> Diego Berrueta
> R&D Department  -  CTIC Foundation
> E-mail: diego.berrueta@fundacionctic.org
> Phone: +34 984 29 12 12
> Parque Científico Tecnológico Gijón-Asturias-Spain
> www.fundacionctic.org
>
>
>
>
>

--
Diego Berrueta
R&D Department  -  CTIC Foundation
E-mail: diego.berrueta@fundacionctic.org
Phone: +34 984 29 12 12
Parque Científico Tecnológico Gijón-Asturias-Spain
www.fundacionctic.org
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2008 09:38:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 9 October 2008 09:38:20 GMT