W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: TR references checker

From: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 10:43:14 +0200
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: spec-prod@w3.org
Message-Id: <1090831394.29618.22.camel@stratustier>
Le dim 25/07/2004 ŗ 20:37, Bjoern Hoehrmann a ťcrit :
> * Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux wrote:
> >I've put on-line a 1st release of a tool allowing to check that links to
> >dated TR documents are still up to date:
> >http://www.w3.org/2004/07/references-checker-ui
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml might be useful to extend it to
> check for RFCs. I am not sure whether there is similar machine-readable
> data for Internet Drafts... 

Dan Connolly had come up with a script that turns this HTML list in RDF:
http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfcIndexGrok.pl

Having this list maintained somewhere would also make it possible to use
the TR bibliography builder with RFC; it's still on my someday pile to
look at this, but haven't really found the time...

> >"""
> >The following references were found in this document, and point to an
> >outdate version of a W3C Technical Report:
> >    * Potential outdated ref: Character
> >      Model for the World Wide Web
> >    * Potential outdated ref: HTML 4.0
> >      Specification
> >    * Potential outdated ref: Extensible Markup
> >      Language (XML) 1.0
> >"""
> 
> It might be better UI-wise to state "newer version available" rather
> than "potential outdated ref".

Hmm... In fact, due to the way the checker works as of today, this
wording would likely be more confusing; indeed, the checker quotes the
full sentence where the link to the outdated reference is made; in my
example, these were only in the references section, so the sentences
were the titles of the specifications; but in some cases (e.g. [1]), the
citation wouldn't go well with the mention of a newer version available.

Still, I agree that the UI could be made better; especially, I think it
would be more useful if the checker was able to give a link to the newer
version; this is doable, but will require a bit of work.

Thanks for the feedback!

Dom

1.
http://www.w3.org/2000/06/webdata/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2004%2F07%2Freferences-checker&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fcgi.w3.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Ftidy-if%3FdocAddr%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.w3.org%252FTR%252F2004%252FWD-qaframe-spec-20040602%252F&

-- 
Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/
W3C/ERCIM
mailto:dom@w3.org


Received on Monday, 26 July 2004 04:43:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:19:00 UTC