- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 10:02:32 +0100
- To: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
- CC: jan.grant@bris.ac.uk, brian_mcbride@hp.com, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Art: > However, it's not on the agenda for the Oct 12 meeting: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0173.html > > Jan, Brian - what's up? Jan gave regrets for this week too. Jeremy: > > Personally I would find latest.zip more useful if it did not include > > unapproved TCs. Art: > I think it would be fine to have two zip's: latest_All.zip (everthing > including those TCs not approved] and latest_Approved.zip (only > Approved TCs). +1 Jeremy: > > There is a maintenance issue here - is it realistic to update latest.zip on > > every change. Art: > I don't think it's necessary to update the zip upon *every* change > especially given the current rate of new test cases or the rate of > approval. A couple of times/week should be fine (perhaps automated > if I can determine how to run cron over AFS). +1 Jeremy: > > As a test case user I would like to have a single URL that I go to to check > > conformance with the latest WG decisions. Obviously that can link to other > > URLs. Also a time lag is acceptable. Art: > I'm not following you here ... Ideally in my ARP test package I would have a single well-known URL (e.g. the manifest file) that I go to. If everything works from there with no other hard coded w3c URLs then that's real cool. From a time point of view, publications delays are inevitable, and a couple of weeks is really no worse than a couple of hours. Jeremy
Received on Friday, 12 October 2001 04:57:50 UTC