On 20/10/2017 15:56, "Andy Seaborne" <[email protected]> wrote:
Given this, references to the 2015 are spurious and misleading.
If you read the original bachelors thesis that Marco referenced [1] the
equivalent text and the footnote is as follows:
3 https://jena.apache.org/ retrieved at 13.12.2015
Which would indeed be Jena 3.0.1, so the original research was started in
December 2015 and completed sometime between then and July 2016 when that
thesis was submitted.
I would guess that when it was reformatted into a workshop paper they simply
checked that all the URLs still worked and updated the footnotes accordingly
Maybe we are just splitting hairs and expecting too much, it just frustrates
me when someone discovers a problem and makes no effort to resolve it
Rob
[1]
https://west.uni-koblenz.de/sites/default/files/studying/theses-files/bachelorarbeit-adrian-skubella-benchmarks-for-sparql-property-paths.pdf
