The status document for the RDF Model and Syntax Specification

View: New views
2 Messages — Rating Filter:   Alert me  

The status document for the RDF Model and Syntax Specification

by Airi Salminen :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message


Hi!

In comparing the RDF Recommendation published in February 1999 and the RDF
Recommendation documents published in February 2004 I came to the status
document at http://www.w3.org/1999/.status/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/status.
In the document it is slightly misleading that in the 2004-02-10 dated
note telling

"This W3C Recommendation has been superceded by set of six documents
(Primer, Concepts, Syntax, Semantics, Vocabulary, and Test Cases) jointly
describing updates to the syntax and a more detailed model."

the six links lead to the corresponding Proposed Recommendations dated in
15 December 2003, not to the corresponding Recommendations dated in 10
February 2004. This is a very minor issue but requires from the reader
clicking the Newest Version link of each document to reach the
corresponding
Recommendation documents.

Best regards,

Airi Salminen



--
Airi Salminen, Professor
Department of Computer Science and Information Systems
P.O. Box 35
FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä
Finland
airi.salminen@...
gsm: +358-50-5186284
office phone: +358-14-2603031
http://www.cs.jyu.fi/~airi/









Re: The status document for the RDF Model and Syntax Specification

by Ralph R. Swick :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message


At 10:16 PM 8/20/2008 +0300, Airi Salminen wrote:
>In comparing the RDF Recommendation published in February 1999 and the RDF
>Recommendation documents published in February 2004 I came to the status
>document at http://www.w3.org/1999/.status/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/status.
...
>the six links lead to the corresponding Proposed Recommendations dated in
>15 December 2003, not to the corresponding Recommendations dated in 10
>February 2004.

Thank you for pointing out this mistake, Airi.  I have corrected the page.

Regards,
Ralph Swick
W3C/MIT