Hugo Haas | 16 Jul 09:27 2004
Picon

xmlspec.xsl 1.11 bug fix: <at> id on item dropped

Hi Norm.

The id attribute on item elements is dropped by the XSLT style sheet,
which breaks specref's.

I am attaching a patch for it. If you want to test it, I have a fixed
version at:

    http://www.w3.org/2004/07/xmlspec-fixed-item-id.xsl

Regards,

Hugo

--

-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo <at> w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
--- ../../2002/xmlspec/xhtml/1.11/xmlspec.xsl	2004-02-18 19:17:43.000000000 +0100
+++ xmlspec-fixed-item-id.xsl	2004-07-16 09:20:03.000000000 +0200
 <at>  <at>  -6,7 +6,7  <at>  <at> 
 <!-- ====================================================================== -->
 <!-- xmlspec.xsl: An HTML XSL[1] Stylesheet for XML Spec V2.1[2] markup

-     Version: $Id: xmlspec.xsl,v 1.49 2004/02/18 15:31:32 NormanWalsh Exp $
+     Version: $Id: xmlspec-fixed-item-id.xsl,v 1.1 2004/07/16 07:20:03 hugo Exp $

      URI:     http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/spec-prod/html/xmlspec.xsl

(Continue reading)

Dominique Hazaël-Massieux | 21 Jul 11:12 2004
Picon

TR references checker

Hello spec-prod,

I've put on-line a 1st release of a tool allowing to check that links to
dated TR documents are still up to date:
http://www.w3.org/2004/07/references-checker-ui
see e.g. the results on an old Rec (DOM Level 2):
"""
The following references were found in this document, and point to an
outdate version of a W3C Technical Report:
    * Potential outdated ref: Character
      Model for the World Wide Web
    * Potential outdated ref: HTML 4.0
      Specification
    * Potential outdated ref: Extensible Markup
      Language (XML) 1.0
"""
http://www.w3.org/2000/06/webdata/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2004%2F07%2Freferences-checker&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fcgi.w3.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Ftidy-if%3FdocAddr%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.w3.org%252FTR%252F2000%252FREC-DOM-Level-2-Core-20001113%252Freferences.html

The tools has some limitations to the links it checks, and has probably
room for improvements (suggestions welcome); its likely most useful use
case would be Proposed Edited Recommendations, who are likely to have
old references, but it may also be applied usefully to any other
document (TR or not).

I've linked it from the W3C Editors page [1], nearby the related
bibliography extractor [2].

As always, the tool relies on an XSLT [3], and the TR in RDF data [4];
more on this topic on my blog [5].

(Continue reading)

Bjoern Hoehrmann | 25 Jul 20:37 2004
Picon
Picon

Re: TR references checker


* Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote:
>I've put on-line a 1st release of a tool allowing to check that links to
>dated TR documents are still up to date:
>http://www.w3.org/2004/07/references-checker-ui

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml might be useful to extend it to
check for RFCs. I am not sure whether there is similar machine-readable
data for Internet Drafts... 

>"""
>The following references were found in this document, and point to an
>outdate version of a W3C Technical Report:
>    * Potential outdated ref: Character
>      Model for the World Wide Web
>    * Potential outdated ref: HTML 4.0
>      Specification
>    * Potential outdated ref: Extensible Markup
>      Language (XML) 1.0
>"""

It might be better UI-wise to state "newer version available" rather
than "potential outdated ref".

Thanks!

Dominique Hazaël-Massieux | 26 Jul 10:43 2004
Picon

Re: TR references checker

Le dim 25/07/2004 à 20:37, Bjoern Hoehrmann a écrit :
> * Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote:
> >I've put on-line a 1st release of a tool allowing to check that links to
> >dated TR documents are still up to date:
> >http://www.w3.org/2004/07/references-checker-ui
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml might be useful to extend it to
> check for RFCs. I am not sure whether there is similar machine-readable
> data for Internet Drafts... 

Dan Connolly had come up with a script that turns this HTML list in RDF:
http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfcIndexGrok.pl

Having this list maintained somewhere would also make it possible to use
the TR bibliography builder with RFC; it's still on my someday pile to
look at this, but haven't really found the time...

> >"""
> >The following references were found in this document, and point to an
> >outdate version of a W3C Technical Report:
> >    * Potential outdated ref: Character
> >      Model for the World Wide Web
> >    * Potential outdated ref: HTML 4.0
> >      Specification
> >    * Potential outdated ref: Extensible Markup
> >      Language (XML) 1.0
> >"""
> 
> It might be better UI-wise to state "newer version available" rather
> than "potential outdated ref".
(Continue reading)

Martin Duerst | 28 Jul 10:07 2004
Picon

Re: TR references checker


At 20:37 04/07/25 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:

>* Dominique Haza$BuM(B-Massieux wrote:
> >I've put on-line a 1st release of a tool allowing to check that links to
> >dated TR documents are still up to date:
> >http://www.w3.org/2004/07/references-checker-ui
>
>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml might be useful to extend it to
>check for RFCs. I am not sure whether there is similar machine-readable
>data for Internet Drafts...

The link checker should deal with expired Internet Drafts,
assuming that you have a link.

Regards,    Martin.

Bjoern Hoehrmann | 28 Jul 17:50 2004
Picon
Picon

Re: TR references checker


* Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote:
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml might be useful to extend it to
>> check for RFCs. I am not sure whether there is similar machine-readable
>> data for Internet Drafts... 
>
>Dan Connolly had come up with a script that turns this HTML list in RDF:
>http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfcIndexGrok.pl

Well, the script actually turns the text/plain index file into RDF and
the document I referred to is XML not HTML... :-)

>> It might be better UI-wise to state "newer version available" rather
>> than "potential outdated ref".
>
>Hmm... In fact, due to the way the checker works as of today, this
>wording would likely be more confusing;

Well, I thought of something like

  There are newer versions available for the following references:

    +-----------+-------------+
    | Reference | New version |
    ...

That should not really confuse anyone...

Bjoern Hoehrmann | 28 Jul 17:53 2004
Picon
Picon

Re: TR references checker


* Martin Duerst wrote:
>> >I've put on-line a 1st release of a tool allowing to check that links to
>> >dated TR documents are still up to date:
>> >http://www.w3.org/2004/07/references-checker-ui
>>
>>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml might be useful to extend it to
>>check for RFCs. I am not sure whether there is similar machine-readable
>>data for Internet Drafts...
>
>The link checker should deal with expired Internet Drafts,
>assuming that you have a link.

That depends... http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-charmod-20040225/ for
example refers to

  http://www.w3.org/International/iri-edit/draft-duerst-iri-06.txt

rather than

  http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-iri-06.txt

for which a link checker won't help...

Dominique Hazaël-Massieux | 28 Jul 17:55 2004
Picon

Re: TR references checker

Le mer 28/07/2004 à 17:50, Bjoern Hoehrmann a écrit :
> * Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote:
> >> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml might be useful to extend it to
> >> check for RFCs. 
> >
> >Dan Connolly had come up with a script that turns this HTML list in RDF:
> >http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfcIndexGrok.pl
> 
> Well, the script actually turns the text/plain index file into RDF and
> the document I referred to is XML not HTML... :-)

Oh, sorry for the confusion; I didn't look closely enough at the
references you gave; I guess I'll have to investigate it then :)

> >Hmm... In fact, due to the way the checker works as of today, this
> >wording would likely be more confusing;
> 
> Well, I thought of something like
> 
>   There are newer versions available for the following references:
> 
>     +-----------+-------------+
>     | Reference | New version |
>     ...
> 
> That should not really confuse anyone...

That's my ultimate goal, but as it stands, I can't  systematically find
what's the new version of the draft; i.e., I know that a draft is
outdated if its URI is not in tr.rdf, but that's the only information I
(Continue reading)


Gmane