W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2004

Primer sanity check update

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:01:19 -0500
Message-ID: <40239E2F.3060508@acm.org>
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, em@w3.org

This is an updated sanity check on the Primer, 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-primer-20030117/, CVS 1.39 
(I don't mean to be a pest, but the only way I have of monitoring the 
situation is periodically rechecking the Primer, and continuing to note 
any issues I see).  I distinguish old (previously-raised) issues that 
have yet to be addressed, and new issues.


1. [old] There's a typo in Section 2.2:  "synonymn" should be "synonym".

2. [old] The SOTD description of the earlier RDF documents (RDF MS and 
RDF Schema) this new set replaces cites the 1999 PR version of RDF 
Schema as being replaced.  However, the Primer discussion of these 
earlier documents at the end of Section 1 and the Primer reference 
[RDF-S] cite the 2000 CR version of RDF Schema (Test Cases reference 
[RDF-SCHEMA] also cites the 2000 CR version rather than the 1999 PR 
version).  This may create some confusion.

3. [old] The boilerplate just before the Abstract says "The English 
version of this specification is the only normative version."  But the 
Primer isn't normative.  Similarly, under "Status of this Document", the 
second para says "It is a stable document and may be used as reference 
material or cited as a normative reference from another document".  I 
know this is boilerplate, but once again, the Primer isn't normative.

4. [old] "Status of this Document" only mentions changes since the PR 
working draft, but the change list includes all changes since the first 
Last Call version.  (a) Are the other change log entries to be deleted? 
  (b) If so, there are anchors in the text that some of these entries 
point to (to highlight where the changes were made).  Should those 
anchors be removed or left in place (IOW, how clean do you want the 
source to be)?

5. [old] In Section 2.1 (and also in Appendix B) the URL that the text 
"Extensible Markup Language" points to is a dated version of the XML 
spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210.html), but not the 
dated version cited in the references 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006).  So the URL will have to 
either be updated or removed (leaving just the pointer to the [XML] 
reference).

6. [new] In the RDF Vocabulary document 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-schema-20030117/, CVS 1.60, 
this is now in the draft Rec form.  However, while the reference 
[RDF-PRIMER] links to the 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-primer-20030117/ version, 
the text of that reference, which used to refer to the 05 September 2003 
Working Draft, now refers to the 15 December 2003 Proposed Rec, rather 
than the Rec version.
*The same is true of the other references to the current RDF Core 
documents*;  that is, the links are to the 20030117 versions, but the 
text of the references cite the 15 December 2003 Proposed Recs.

--Frank
Received on Friday, 6 February 2004 09:00:54 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Friday, 6 February 2004 09:00:57 EST