sc2.5.1_l1_003 step 2: Structure review

Hi group,

As per my action item from the last teleconference here we have the structure review (step 2) of the third test sample with some comments 

* contact information of the submitter is available; (see comments to the previous test sample)
* all necessary files are committed and available;

The metadata file is not well-formed
The test sample content is not functional (not being interpreted at the server)

* all necessary files follow the naming conventions; (see comments to the previous test sample)
* all necessary files are valid in their use; (see comments to the previous test sample)
* there are no unintentional broken links; OK
* all the metadata restrictions are applied, for example:
	o dates and other values use the correct format; OK
      o copyright notices and other values are correct;

The test sample content includes copyright information that is different from the metadata copyright information 

      o titles, description, and other texts are correct; OK
      o identifiers exist and have the correct syntax; OK
      o techniques and locations are referenced correctly;
Apparently the locations refer to the server-side language not to the generated content. Is this what we expect?

      o location pointers are consistent with each other; OK.

Initial content review can't be done since the example is not functional


Carlos Iglesias

CTIC Foundation
Science and Technology Park of Gijón
33203 - Gijón, Asturias, Spain

phone: +34 984291212
fax: +34 984390612

Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 09:29:05 UTC