- From: Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 09:15:56 -0400
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- CC: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Sandro: I'm afraid I don't like this answer! If W3C is pushing ReSpec shouldn't ReSpec generated documents automatically pass pubrules as long as the HTML and Links are correct? Doing this extra strep is a pain. All the best, Ashok On 10/22/2013 7:49 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > On 10/22/2013 06:39 AM, Steve Battle wrote: >> Does anyone have experience experience with pubrules? >> >> I’ve done the best I can to make UC&R compatible with pubrules, but it >> doesn’t appear to be strictly compatible with ReSpec which auto-generates >> a lot of the content that pubrules complains is missing. >> >> Does the ReSpec script have to be compiled out somehow? > > Yes. See http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Tips_on_publishing_ReSpec-based_documents > for how it's done in RDF-WG. There's also respec2html if you want command-line, but it has its own complexity. > >> Also, should I change specStatus before making the request to the >> webmaster, or does the document in mercurial remain the editors draft? The >> status is currently “ED” for Editors Draft, > > Make the saved pure-HTML one be WD, and keep the respec one ED. >> and what _is_ the code for >> second call working draft? > > Sorry, do you mean second last call? The code for that is the same as last call. The fact that it's the second one isn't something the system/process cares about. > > -- Sandro > > >> >> If nobody knows, I'll send what I have to the webmaster. >> Regards, Steve. >> >> -- >> Steve Battle >> Semantic Engineer >> >> Mobile: +44 (0)7503 624 613 >> Landline: +44 (0)1173 709 678 >> E-mail: steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk >> Web: www.sysemia.com >> >> Sysemia Limited >> The Innovation Centre, Bristol & Bath Science Park, Dirac Crescent, >> Emerson's Green, Bristol BS16 7FR Registered in England and Wales. Company >> Number: 7555456 >> >> DISCLAIMER >> Information contained in this e-mail is intended for the use of the >> addressee only, and is confidential and may also be privileged. If you >> receive this message in error, please advise us immediately. If you are >> not the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, >> copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly >> prohibited and may be unlawful. Attachments to this e-mail may contain >> software viruses which may damage your systems. Sysemia Ltd have taken >> reasonable steps to minimise this risk, but we advise that any attachments >> are virus checked before they are opened. >> >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 22 October 2013 13:16:39 UTC