KhronosGroup / OpenCL-Registry

OpenCL API and Extension Registry.
112 stars 42 forks source link

Dead link #126

Closed etiennemlb closed 6 months ago

etiennemlb commented 2 years ago

Hi, On the OpenCL spec registry (https://registry.khronos.org/OpenCL/) I beleive the OpenCL 2.0 C Language Specification (April 13, 2016) link is dead.

alycm commented 2 years ago

Hello,

Thank you for your report. Indeed the link is dead. The target file was removed in PR https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenCL-Registry/pull/61 but it looks like this link was missed.

It was removed because the OpenCL C 2.0 specification was still getting revisions via OpenCL 2.1 and 2.2 (it was still OpenCL C 2.0, there was no OpenCL C 2.1 or 2.2). The original OpenCL C 2.0 PDF did not have the fixes from the revisions and due to changing the source format of the specification it was not easy to maintain parallel versions.

Options to fix:

  1. Link to the OpenCL C specification shipped for OpenCL 2.2, this is still describing OpenCL C 2.0.
  2. Restore the previous OpenCL C 2.0 PDF, this is less attractive because it would be missing bug fixes from newer revisions.
oddhack commented 2 years ago
  1. Link to the OpenCL C specification shipped for OpenCL 2.2, this is still describing OpenCL C 2.0.

N.b. unless there's some compelling reason for a landing page at the old URL, this is best done by using a top-level .htaccess file in the repository to rewrite. They can be a bit tricky to setup (mostly because you can't test them until they've gone live), so let me know if you want any assistance.

bashbaug commented 2 years ago

I think we should "link" to the OpenCL C specification shipped for OpenCL 2.2. I think this is better than restoring an older specification that is missing bug fixes, as Alastair mentioned. I don't have a strong opinion whether we do this via a .htaccess file or just update the webpage itself - we'll probably want to update the modification date on the webpage regardless, so maybe that's the path of least resistance?