- From: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
- Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 18:34:25 +0200
- To: Gavin Carothers <gavin@carothers.name>
- CC: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Gavin, I did some edits to the N-Quads source: * I removed the following internal links, as I could not see a clear target: #string #sec-escapes #numeric * I changed #grammar-production-RDFLiteral to #grammar-production-literal (this appeared to be an error) * I changed #grammar-production-STRING-LITERAL2 to #grammar-production-STRING-LITERAL-QUOTE (I assume this was also an error) and added a link to the corresponding grammar rule. * I included a ref to Turtle * I changed the relative URI references of RDF Concepts to absolute ones (to the WD version). Just for the record. Guus > > I assume they should be similar to the corresponding ones from N-Triples. > > Guus > > On 06-04-13 02:56, Guus Schreiber wrote: >> Gavin, >> >> N-Triples is now fine, except for 8 internal links which I'm not sure >> where they should point to, see below. It would be a great help if you >> could fix these in the source file. >> >> I'll check N-Quads tomorrow. >> >> Guus >> >> #terms >> #string >> #grammar-production-RDFLiteral >> #prod-ntriples-triple >> #sec-escapes >> #predicate-lists >> #sec-grammar >> #numeric >> >> >> On 05-04-13 22:12, Guus Schreiber wrote: >>> Hi Gavin, >>> >>> I corrected the TriG document tonight. It still had quite a number of >>> errors. I had to chancge a few things in the trig-bnf.html. If you're >>> generating this file automatically, you might have to change the source >>> (but looking at the bnf source, this doesn't seem to be tha case. >>> >>> The result is at: >>> >>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/drafts/trig/Overview.html >>> >>> I know the US is a religious country, but I assumed you didn;t really >>> mean to insert a "providence" example, so I changed that to "provenance" >>> :). >>> >>> Sandro/Ivan: the HTML validator generates errors for the RDFa >>> attributes, but I assume that will be OK with the Webmaster?! >>> >>> Have a good weekend, >>> Guus >>> >>> On 04-04-13 19:48, Guus Schreiber wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04-04-13 19:46, Gavin Carothers wrote: >>>>> Yep, I know. I just haven't had a chance to get to these. We have a >>>>> round of due diligence and a major release scheduled for next Tuesday. >>>> >>>> Undestood. Let me know in case it wont' work vefore Tuesday, as 9 >>>> Apr is >>>> the next publication date. If not, I will have a go in the weekend. >>>> >>>> Guus >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl >>>>> <mailto:guus.schreiber@vu.nl>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Gavin, >>>>> >>>>> The three documents still have problems with pub rules, apart from >>>>> the ReSpec issues. Could you please check the errata in Sec. 7 of >>>>> the report generated by the purules checker [1]? These are mainly >>>>> broken fragment links. Hopefully it won't take much of your time. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> Guus >>>>> >>>>> []1 http://www.w3.org/2005/07/__pubrules >>>>> <http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
Received on Saturday, 6 April 2013 16:34:54 UTC