- From: Chime Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 21:53:51 -0500
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: SPARQL WG <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I've checked d11 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-sparql11-http-rdf-update-20121108 (Looks good) and I'm (now) looking over d09 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-sparql11-entailment-20121108 -- Chime Ogbuji Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com) On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > The publications pass all the automated tests, but I may well have > broken something in the process of getting them there. So please check > the color-coded diff linked from each one (it's diff.html), showing the > changes since the last publication. And make sure that roughly lines > up with #changelog for each one. If it doesn't, then go ahead and edit > the changelog, or fix whatever else you need to. From the editors draft > to what's in the publication location, some rewrite scripts are done -- > if the ED is fine and what's published is broken, be sure to let me know. > > A few notes on the specific documents are below. > > Please confirm which documents you've checked, until we have at least > one editor checking each. HOPEFULLY that will be before about noon ET > on Wednesday -- otherwise we might have to slide the publication date > another five days. :-( > > -- Sandro > > > === d01 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-sparql11-overview-20121108 > > Nothing special. > > > > === d02 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-sparql11-query-20121108 > > Please confirm my re-phrasing of the red box about rdf:langstring. We > can't call it "at risk" any more, going to PR. A pedantic reading of > W3C practice might say we can't using rdf:langstring in a REC until > RDF 1.1 Concepts is at least in PR, but I'm comfortable with the text > I proposed here. > > > > === d03 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-sparql11-update-20121108 > > changed rIRIref to rIRIREF > changed [r]VarOrIRIref to [r]VarOrIri > > http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#templatesWithBNodes doesn't work, but > it's okay because this does: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-sparql11-query-20121108/#templatesWithBNodes > > > > === d04 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-sparql11-service-description-20121108 > > Nothing special. > > > === d05 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-sparql11-federated-query-20121108 > > Nothing special. > > > > === d06 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-sparql11-results-json-20121108 > > Nothing special. > > > > === d07 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-sparql11-results-csv-tsv-20121108 > > I don't know how to run ReSpec from the command line, so I just made > the editors draft manually be a PR for now. Lame, I know. If you > edit this, let me know -- the change wont be picked up automatically. > > > > === d08 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PER-rdf-sparql-XMLres-20121108 > > Someone should make sure the errata are addressed. I changed the xsl > links so we can fix things after publication, at least, but I don't have > any extra > brain cells to think about the errata right now. > > > > === d09 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-sparql11-entailment-20121108 > > Nothing special. > > > > === d10 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-sparql11-protocol-20121108 > > Nothing special. > > > === d11 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-sparql11-http-rdf-update-20121108 > > Nothing special.
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 02:54:21 UTC