W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: Incorrect data in the specref repository

From: Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:19:46 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOk_reEydtN9Zxu6CSs+VURmoLMjeas+3aRXcfwrv8H3iELqgA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org>
Cc: "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
Thanks so much for running this down.  It is not urgent as we are not
republishing for a couple of weeks - just glad I noticed it now.


On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org> wrote:

> On Friday, July 19, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:
> > I noticed today that the HTML+RDFa spec in specref is returning
> >
> > [HTML-RDFA]
> > Manu Sporny et al. HTML+RDFa 1.1 (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-in-html/).
> 25 May 2011. W3C Working Draft. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-in-html/
> >
> >
> > but the current draft is:
> >
> > [HTML-RDFA]
> > Manu Sporny et al. HTML+RDFa 1.1 (http://www.w3.org/TR/html-rdfa). 25
> June 2013. W3C Proposed Recommendation. URL:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html-rdfa/
> >
> > How can I get this updated since I assume this is now being
> automatically generated.
>
> So there's a bug in tr.rdf that's been fixed today that caused infinite
> recursion when trying to handle specs which have changed shortname.
>
> I think this issue is partially related to this. So upcoming changes
> should fix this mid term. The other problem is case sensitivity. And we
> already have a bug open for this.
>
> In the meantime you can either use the lower-cased version [html-rdfa]
> which works[1], or simply change the alias of the uppercased version to
> point to the lower one (you can even do that locally if you want).
>
> Best,
>
> --tobie
>
> ---
> [1]: http://specref.jit.su/bibrefs?refs=html-rdfa
>
>


-- 
Shane P. McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Friday, 19 July 2013 18:20:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:19 UTC