- From: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:19:28 +0200
- To: ERT WG <public-wai-ert@w3.org>
Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb: > Dear group, > > Ref: <http://www.w3.org/2005/05/tr-versions> > > Please find above some background on versioning practices at W3C. The > issue is not determining major/minor version numbers for EARL but that > there are cross-dependencies between different Technical Report (TR) > documents. If we try to define EARL centrally in single place then we > may simplify these relationships. Here is a suggestion: > > # "EARL 1.0" consists of these parts: > - EARL 1.0 Schema, Recommendation of Day/Month/Year > - EARL 1.0 Guide, WG Note of Day/Month/Year > - HTTP-in-RDF, WG Note of Day/Month/Year > - Content-in-RDF, WG Note of Day/Month/Year > - Pointers-in-RDF, WG Note of Day/Month/Year > > This definition for EARL 1.0 is to be recorded in the conformance > section of EARL 1.0 Schema, which is the core definition for EARL. ACK! -- Johannes Koch Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology FIT Web Compliance Center Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany Phone: +49-2241-142628 Fax: +49-2241-142065
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 10:20:09 UTC