Help testing improvements to site infrastructure

Hi all,

Richard Wallis has been busy integrating improved parsers into the site codebase. We think it is ready to go, and that you
should not see anything different from the outside, but there is
always the possibility that the new parsers (for RDFa, JSON-LD etc
schema definitions) interpret our files differently from the older
ones. So we'd appreciate a few more sanity checks before integrating
these changes into the live

You can see a test version of this work at
(also etc.).

Historically we have defined our schemas using a somewhat unusual file
format based on HTML+RDFa1.1, and we have parsed it with a custom (and
non-compliant) pseudo-RDFa format. These changes integrate the
opensource rdflib parsers which implement RDFa 1.1 much more
accurately, as well as opening up the possibility that we might use
other notations like JSON-LD for schemas (including extensions) in
futre. For now we won't rush into those discussions, but we do want to
make sure we haven't broken anything, so thanks for any feedback!
Please have a click around and let us know if anything seems
suspiciously different to the normal site. The site is running on the
materials being put together for our next release candidate so there
may be rough edges in the actual content, but that's another matter.
We are mainly here looking to sanity check our belief that the new
parser is reading the definitions from the data/schema.rdfa file



Received on Thursday, 7 April 2016 12:41:57 UTC