W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > March 2003

Test WD - finished version

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 09:39:17 +0100
To: connolly@w3.org, jos.deroo@agfa.com
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200303280939.17334.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


Jos - see end of msg concerning other changes (not in WD)

Hi Dan, Jos,

I have now finished the last changes on the test WD.

Found at:
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/ (5 files)
with a tgz at:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2003Mar/att-0087/testwd.tgz

Some publication related issues:

1: I stuck the following in the SOTD - but I realize Dan gets to say what he 
wants:
[[

 This is a Working Draft of "OWL Test Cases" for review by members of the W3C 
and other interested parties in the general public. We particular seek 
reports from implementators concerning both errors in the tests and 
successful execution of these tests, both proposed and approved. The tests 
are still in development. Each test may be edited or have a change of status 
according to the process specified below. Further tests are being added. 
Reviewers should note in particular that the syntactic levels indicated with 
each test file (Lite, DL, Full) have never been validated, and have not been 
updated in light of recent working group decisions. An editors' version of 
this document, with the latest tests, can be found at 
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/. Other expected changes 
are indicated by editors' notes, and in Appendix D. Despite this flux, the 
working group would value implementor feedback on the tests both in this 
document and those found in the editors' version. Contributions of additional 
tests are invited. 

]]

2: 404s reported by Link Checker - there is a config problem in the test area 
- I've no idea what it is. (See previous message
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Mar/0261.html
)

3: The URLs for owl-semantics and owl-guide assume publication on 31st March - 
I can regenerate easily if that ceases to be the case.

4: Because of 2 & 3, the document fails the link checker tests.

5: The link checker still incorrectly barfs on RDF frag ids

===========

Changes in editors draft production:

I've added two new files to the editors-draft JSP:
  index.html - gives useful links to the other tools with correct parameters
  update.jsp - allows generation of all five files from one button - either as 
a WD or an editors draft - they then need to be CVS committed
  (Combined with an XSLT on the XXL file will allow a compound document to be 
created)


Jeremy
Received on Friday, 28 March 2003 03:38:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:58 GMT