W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: WG-NOTE and Previous Version

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 15:12:19 +0100
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Cc: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>, spec-prod@w3.org, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Message-ID: <gfkpf959r7r9lqd92mdobqctu4n759idci@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Robin Berjon wrote:
>On 13/02/2014 12:09 , Guus Schreiber wrote:
>> The RDF WG is publishing a document as WG Note which hasn't been
>> published before [1]. ReSpec complains that a "previous version" is
>> missing, and puts in an empty <dt>Previous version</dt>. Are we doing
>> something wrong or is a ReSpec update needed? When I removed the
>> "Previous version" manually from the static version it passed pubrules.
>
>It seems likely that Notes will confuse me to the end of my days.
>
>My understanding of pubrules is that a WG-NOTE needs to have a Previous 
>Version. The NG checker agrees with me (but then again, I wrote it so...).

"A Working Group MAY publish a Working Group Note with or without its
prior publication as a Working Draft" tells us the Process document and
accordingly some Working Group Notes do not have identifiable previous
versions.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 14:12:47 UTC

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