Re: Deprecating the old pubrules on Aug 1st, 2016

Just to clarify something...

I assume the policy for document format is that the PRIMARY format must be
HTML5.  It remains the case that if a document has alternative versions in
whatever format, those will continue to be permitted.  We often include PDF
or EPub versions of Recommendations.  Moreover, if we update the RDFa
family of Recommendations again, we would of course include a version of
XHTML+RDFa that is encoded in XHTML+RDFa.

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa/

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 6:41 AM, Denis Ah-Kang <denis@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> When the 2014 process document was released [1], we agreed on a 2-year
> transition period in which WGs could still operate under the 2005
> process. Starting from August 1st, all the WGs must use the 2015
> process document.
> Since we no longer want to invest resources in maintaining the old
> pubrules [2], we think the end of the transition period is a good
> opportunity to make Specberus [3] the official TR document checker.
>
> The latest version of Specberus is now available at:
> https://www.w3.org/pubrules/
>
> That version is still missing a few pieces (docs and rules) and contains
> a couple of bugs but we will take care of fixing everything in the next
> days.
>
> The major changes you will see are:
> - a new UI
> - only the process document 2015 supported
> - only HTML5 documents supported. Since 2015, only a handful of
> documents are still being published in HTML4 or XHTML1.0, and since
> supporting these doctypes is too costly in terms of resources, we
> prefer to help people migrate their documents to HTML5
> - the service getdocrdf (e.g. [4]) being replaced with an API producing
> JSON. If you rely on that service, do let me know and I will show you
> how to do the migration. Note, tr.rdf remains untouched.
>
> In terms of new features, Specberus provides a REST API [5] you can use
> to check your documents (e.g. [6]) or extract their metadata (e.g. [7]).
>
> If you are planning to publish new documents on /TR in the upcoming
> weeks, I strongly suggest you to run it through the new pubrules and
> report bugs on github [8].
>
> Marcos, Shane and Tab, Echidna is already using Specberus to check
> documents before publishing them so I don't expect major problem
> for Respec and Bikeshed but let me know if I overlooked something.
>
> As usual, feel free to ping us on irc (#pub) if there's any problem
> with the new pubrules.
>
> Denis
>
>
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2014JulSep/0048.html
> [2] https://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules
> [3] https://github.com/w3c/specberus
> [4]
>
> https://www.w3.org/2001/10/getdocrdf?docAddr=https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-reporting-1-20160407/
> [5] https://github.com/w3c/specberus/blob/master/README.md#5-rest-api
> [6]
>
> https://www.w3.org/pubrules/api/validate?url=http://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-charmod-norm-20160407/&profile=auto
> [7]
>
> https://www.w3.org/pubrules/api/metadata?url=http://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-charmod-norm-20160407/&profile=auto
> [8] https://github.com/w3c/specberus/issues
>



-- 
Shane McCarron
Projects Manager, Spec-Ops