W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2009

Re: Minor comments on rdf:text

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:16:47 +0200
Message-ID: <49EED26F.6060603@deri.org>
To: Jie Bao <baojie@gmail.com>
CC: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@deri.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>, "public-rdf-text@w3.org" <public-rdf-text@w3.org>
Thanks,

cc:ed the rdf-text list on that for keeping in context.
Note that I have also asked in yesterday's SPARQL teleconf for a review 
from SPARQL. Andy Seaborne (on this list as well, I think) volunteered 
to provide a review.

best,
Axel

Jie Bao wrote:
> Antoine: Thanks
> 
> Sandro: can we edit the wiki now?
> 
> Jie
> 
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Antoine Zimmermann
> <antoine.zimmermann@deri.org> wrote:
>> I have very minor comments on rdf:text, no reason to postpone publication.
>>
>> Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>> A new set of snapshots:
>>>
>>> linked from:
>>>   [...]
>>>   http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-rdf-text-20090420/
>> Sect.1: "text in various different languages" -> "text in various languages"
>> or "text in different languages".
>>
>>
>> The special bracket characters used to write a pair ( F , v ) take 3 times
>> as much vertical space as any other character (in Firefox 3.0.8) or are
>> replaced by squares (in IE 7.0.5730.11).
>>
>> However, in the Structural Specification document, the special brackets are
>> displayed correctly in Firefox (but still replaced by squares in IE).
>> The differences between rdf:text and SS&FS are:
>>
>> In rdf:text, the code is:
>> <span class="name">&lang; F v &rang;</span>
>>
>> and the CSS says that:
>>
>> .name {
>>    font-family: monospace;
>> }
>>
>> In SS&FS, the code is:
>> &lang; <i>F</i> <i>v</i> &rang;
>>
>> Couldn't we just use normal brackets for all tuples in all documents? This
>> would also make things more consistent, since sometimes tuples are
>> represented with normal brackets, sometimes with angle brackets. BTW, it is
>> a rather standard practice to use normal brackets to write tuples in
>> mathematics.
>>
>>
>> Sect.4, last parag.:
>> "an RDF tool that suports rdf:text MUST ..." -> "an RDF tool that supports
>> rdf:text MUST ..."
>>
>> "(normative or nonnormative)" compare in the header "in these non-normative
>> formats: PDF version". Shouldn't the word "non-normative/nonnormative"
>> normalized throughout the documents?
>> I noticed that both spelling are used in almost all OWL 2 documents.
>>
>>
>> Sect.5.3.2:
>> "a sequence of length 0 or 1 of type rdf:texts" -> "... of type rdf:text"
>>
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Antoine Zimmermann
>> Post-doctoral researcher at:
>> Digital Enterprise Research Institute
>> National University of Ireland, Galway
>> IDA Business Park
>> Lower Dangan
>> Galway, Ireland
>> antoine.zimmermann@deri.org
>> http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Wednesday, 22 April 2009 08:27:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 22 April 2009 08:27:30 GMT