Skip to content

Update SOTD, figures, and section refs #5

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Feb 10, 2023
Merged

Update SOTD, figures, and section refs #5

merged 7 commits into from
Feb 10, 2023

Conversation

gkellogg
Copy link
Member

@gkellogg gkellogg commented Feb 6, 2023

  • Simplifies the SOTD and indicates that there are (again) no substantive changes.
  • Uses class="sectionRef" for most references to sections.

Other than redoing the figures (to fix the errant predicate used in figures 1 and two, this shouldn't need much more work not mentioned in #2.

Once we've finalized the representation of quoted triples in RDF, and presuming that it will not be added to RDF/XML, this will require adding a rational.


Preview | Diff

Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
@gkellogg gkellogg changed the title Update SOTD on section refs Update SOTD and section refs Feb 7, 2023
@gkellogg gkellogg requested review from afs, domel and pchampin February 8, 2023 20:56
@gkellogg
Copy link
Member Author

gkellogg commented Feb 8, 2023

This updates the SVG for the figures, with some minor stylistic license, and fixes the Erratum 20.

This leaves Erratum 29 – Terminology about IRIs that is in most other specs. So, if people are satisfied with this, we can merge.

Note that it doesn't say anything about quoted triples as the group hasn't finalized a direction, or decided if RDF/XML will participate in markup. The CG determined that it would create incompatibilities with previous versions, so RDF/XML would not be updated for this.

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member Author

gkellogg commented Feb 8, 2023

See GitHack version for document including figures.

@afs
Copy link
Contributor

afs commented Feb 8, 2023

Who owns the Google account for the Google docs?

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member Author

gkellogg commented Feb 8, 2023

Probably under my account. I can grant edit rights to individuals, but the document can be cloned fairly easily for future modification, albeit at a different location. I'm happy to give out editor permissions to anyone who's interested. Probably should to at least @pchampin, as W3C Staff.

If there's a better way to do this, such as in a W3C group, I'd be happy to transfer over.

@afs
Copy link
Contributor

afs commented Feb 8, 2023

Ideally, the svg document bytes used to produce the images would be stored at W3C even if the document is elsewhere and editable.

Copy link
Contributor

@domel domel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The figures are in SVG, that's good. I think they can make them more readable (I can do that) but that can probably be done later.

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member Author

gkellogg commented Feb 8, 2023

Ideally, the svg document bytes used to produce the images would be stored at W3C even if the document is elsewhere and editable.

They are in the repo as spec/figure1.svg and spec/figure2.svg with some edits to add the title, description, and metadata as edited from the original. But, you can't really load this in to edit conveniently, or at least I couldn't see a way to do it. The Google diagrams are available, but I don't know a way to download something that could be re-uploaded. At least, this is no worse than before, and the links to the Google versions are in both the .svg files and as comments in front of each figure.

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member Author

gkellogg commented Feb 8, 2023

I added @pchampin with edit access, and I'll ad @domel as well.

@gkellogg gkellogg changed the title Update SOTD and section refs Update SOTD, figures, and section refs Feb 8, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@pchampin pchampin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • One of the change should be reverted for readbility (see comment)
  • in figure2, the highlighting should not rely on color only (a12y); I suggest using wider stroke for the highlighted elements

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member Author

gkellogg commented Feb 9, 2023

Note: caching issues may prevent seeing the update to the SVG. It should be visible here: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/w3c/rdf-xml/no-changes/spec/figure2.svg.

@gkellogg gkellogg requested a review from pchampin February 9, 2023 23:48
Copy link
Contributor

@pchampin pchampin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

minor typos (missing spaces) but apart from that, good to go

Co-authored-by: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
Co-authored-by: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine@w3.org>
@gkellogg gkellogg merged commit 3a36a46 into main Feb 10, 2023
@gkellogg gkellogg deleted the no-changes branch February 10, 2023 21:36
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants