- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:01:19 -0500
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, em@w3.org
This is an updated sanity check on the Primer, http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-primer-20030117/, CVS 1.39 (I don't mean to be a pest, but the only way I have of monitoring the situation is periodically rechecking the Primer, and continuing to note any issues I see). I distinguish old (previously-raised) issues that have yet to be addressed, and new issues. 1. [old] There's a typo in Section 2.2: "synonymn" should be "synonym". 2. [old] The SOTD description of the earlier RDF documents (RDF MS and RDF Schema) this new set replaces cites the 1999 PR version of RDF Schema as being replaced. However, the Primer discussion of these earlier documents at the end of Section 1 and the Primer reference [RDF-S] cite the 2000 CR version of RDF Schema (Test Cases reference [RDF-SCHEMA] also cites the 2000 CR version rather than the 1999 PR version). This may create some confusion. 3. [old] The boilerplate just before the Abstract says "The English version of this specification is the only normative version." But the Primer isn't normative. Similarly, under "Status of this Document", the second para says "It is a stable document and may be used as reference material or cited as a normative reference from another document". I know this is boilerplate, but once again, the Primer isn't normative. 4. [old] "Status of this Document" only mentions changes since the PR working draft, but the change list includes all changes since the first Last Call version. (a) Are the other change log entries to be deleted? (b) If so, there are anchors in the text that some of these entries point to (to highlight where the changes were made). Should those anchors be removed or left in place (IOW, how clean do you want the source to be)? 5. [old] In Section 2.1 (and also in Appendix B) the URL that the text "Extensible Markup Language" points to is a dated version of the XML spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210.html), but not the dated version cited in the references (http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006). So the URL will have to either be updated or removed (leaving just the pointer to the [XML] reference). 6. [new] In the RDF Vocabulary document http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-schema-20030117/, CVS 1.60, this is now in the draft Rec form. However, while the reference [RDF-PRIMER] links to the http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-primer-20030117/ version, the text of that reference, which used to refer to the 05 September 2003 Working Draft, now refers to the 15 December 2003 Proposed Rec, rather than the Rec version. *The same is true of the other references to the current RDF Core documents*; that is, the links are to the 20030117 versions, but the text of the references cite the 15 December 2003 Proposed Recs. --Frank
Received on Friday, 6 February 2004 09:00:54 UTC