- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:55:02 +0200
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: spec-prod@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1091030101.6022.477.camel@stratustier>
Le mer 28/07/2004 à 17:50, Bjoern Hoehrmann a écrit : > * Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote: > >> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml might be useful to extend it to > >> check for RFCs. > > > >Dan Connolly had come up with a script that turns this HTML list in RDF: > >http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfcIndexGrok.pl > > Well, the script actually turns the text/plain index file into RDF and > the document I referred to is XML not HTML... :-) Oh, sorry for the confusion; I didn't look closely enough at the references you gave; I guess I'll have to investigate it then :) > >Hmm... In fact, due to the way the checker works as of today, this > >wording would likely be more confusing; > > Well, I thought of something like > > There are newer versions available for the following references: > > +-----------+-------------+ > | Reference | New version | > ... > > That should not really confuse anyone... That's my ultimate goal, but as it stands, I can't systematically find what's the new version of the draft; i.e., I know that a draft is outdated if its URI is not in tr.rdf, but that's the only information I have. Getting the latest version would require more processing. Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 28 July 2004 11:55:48 UTC