W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: editorial suggestion for RDF Test Cases: wording re 'identical'

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 11:21:33 +0000 (GMT)
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0302081120430.15128-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Dan Brickley wrote:

>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-testcases/
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-testcases-20030123/
>
> 'Most directories have a name that is identical to the related
> issue in the RDF Issue Tracking document. For example, the directory
> rdf-ns-prefix-confusion is identical to the  rdf-ns-prefix-confusion issue.'
>
> The directory and the issue aren't identical; only their names.
>
> Perhaps something like this would work?:
>
> Most directories have a name that is identical to that of the
> corresponding issue in the RDF Issue Tracking document.
> For example, the directory 'rdf-ns-prefix-confusion' is named after the
> 'rdf-ns-prefix-confusion' issue.
>
> cheers,

On reflection, since the manifest file captures the relationship between
a test case and any related issue, I'm inclined to simply strike this
text.

Would that suffice?


-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/
Generalisation is never appropriate.
Received on Saturday, 8 February 2003 06:24:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT