- From: Schreiber, A.T. <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
- Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 12:40:41 +0000
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- CC: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 4 apr. 2013, at 01:42, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: > Hmm, everything looks OK for Semantics, but the checker is complaining. Maybe someone else can take a quick look to see what is going on. > > peter Diabolical. It seems the ReSpec script still generates two errors: a https instead of http link for the W3C style shhet and logo. Took me some time to spot that. Sigh. Peter: there is one broken link left: the D_entailment anchor. That should be the last. Could you fix that? I will take it from there. Guus > > On 04/03/2013 09:33 AM, Guus Schreiber wrote: >> All, >> >> I've written a short wiki page with tips for publishing ReSpec docs: >> >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Tips_on_publishing_ReSpec-based_documents >> >> For those of you with more experience with ReSpec: please check/correct. >> >> Peter: we have a local copy of the biblio file in our repository, see the wiki page. >> >> Hope this helps, >> Guus >> >> On 03-04-13 18:24, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>> I fixed the internal links in Semantics, commenting out many of them. >>> >>> Semantics now has [[...]] for RDF-PLAIN-LITERAL and RDF-VOCABULARY, >>> neither of which appear to exist in the DB. If someone points me at >>> the DB I can try to fix these as well. >>> >>> peter >>> >>> On 04/03/2013 08:04 AM, Guus Schreiber wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> There were some problems with publishing the 4 FPWDs: >>>> >>>> - we're using an out-of-date version of ResPec >>>> - docs were not pu-rules compliant [1]. I did not have time to >>>> ccorrect all of them, in particular the broken links in the Semantics >>>> document. >>>> >>>> Guus >
Received on Thursday, 4 April 2013 12:41:18 UTC