1.1 specs should reference 1.2 versions

[gkellogg]

From #63 (comment) in #63, the following specs used different short-name schemes, so don't automatically reference the 1.2 versions. Specs that do, such as RDF Schema 1.1 show the Latest Published Version using the general short name scheme (rdf-schema in this case) do reference the 1.2 versions.

Either the latest published versions of the following specs should be updated, or some similar reference meathod (such as is used for rdf-mt) should be employed. Note that ReSpec automatically sets Latest published version to include the version number (e.g., "rdf12-concepts") which is either a scheme we want to stick with, or should be overridden to use unversioned naming.

• https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/n-triples/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-n-triples/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/n-quads/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-n-quads/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-mt/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-semantics/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/trig/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-trig/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-turtle/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-xml/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-overview/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-concepts/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-update/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-update/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-service-descsription/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-service-descsription/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-federated-query/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-federated-query/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-results-json/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-results-json/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-results-csv-tsv/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-results-csv-tsv/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-XMLres/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-results-xml/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-entailment/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-entailment/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-protocol/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-protocol/
• https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-http-rdf-update/ – Latest published version should be https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-graph-store-protocol//

[pchampin]

There is an ambiguity in what exactly "Latest Published Version" is supposed to point to: is it

• the latest published release of this particular version of the spec, or
• the latest published release of any version of the spec

The use of the term "version" points to the 2nd interpretation, but the fact that ReSpec uses the versioned short name points to the first one... I'll dig into this.

[pchampin]

According to @deniak, the latest published version link should point to the shortlink for that
same version as the doc itself, e.g. css-transitions-2.

@deniak also points out that certain editors include an additional link to the latest recommendation (example here), which I believe is in line with what @gkellogg suggested yesterday during the call.

[pchampin]

As an aside, I notice that WCAG has chosen a different strategy for version-less names than us: TR/WCAG does not point to the most recent document (currently WCAG 2.2 Proposed Recommendation) but to the most recent recommendation (WCAG 2.1).

Maybe that is something we want to consider.

[pchampin]

This was discussed during today's meeting.

• Last Published Version → same version number
• Versionless short name → latest CR/PR/REC across all version number