Re: Review requested: [was: RE: Draft minutes of RDFCore telecon 20030130]

Dave--

Not to be contradictory, but regarding the Syntax document, 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030117/
, I've found what I believe are some problems (I found these when I 
found some similar problems in reviewing the Primer, and tried to 
compare the Primer to the other documents):

1.  The minutes say that links should go to the shadow TR docs (and I 
assume the above Syntax URL is an example of such a link).  Assuming 
that is true, the "This Version" link, which is
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030317/, isn't 
correct (note "0317" rather than "0117")

2.  Similarly, all the links to the "set of six" documents listed in the 
SOTD are of this "0317" variety rather than "0117".

3.  In the reference [RDF-CONCEPTS], the first link is to the 1215 TR, 
not to shadow TR space, and the "this version" link and corresponding 
text refers to the Primer, not to Concepts.

4.  In the reference [RDF-PRIMER], both the first link and the "this 
version" link (and corresponding text) is to one of these "0317" links 
rather than "0117" (i.e., to shadow TR space)

5.  Ditto in the reference [RDF-VOCABULARY].

I think Test Cases is OK.

--Frank


Dave Beckett wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 11:12:26 -0000, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Thanks Graham.  Please can we have a second reviewer.
>>
> 
> The minutes look fine, with Mike recorded as present.
> 
> I note that I've already done my two review actions:
> 
> 
>>>>ACTION: daveb review syntax
>>>>ACTION: daveb review test cases
>>>>
> 
> During the meeting I checked:
> 
> RDF/XML Syntax
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030117/
> CVS 1.56 and found the changes and references OK.
> 
> RDF Testcases 
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-testcases-20030117/
> CVS 1.73 and found the changes and references OK.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 2 February 2004 09:24:41 UTC