W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > October 2013

Re: RDF Concepts - Definition of "Generalized RDF"

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 23:08:12 -0400
Message-ID: <524B8E1C.6030306@w3.org>
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, public-rdf-comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
On 10/01/2013 10:34 PM, David Booth wrote:
> Regarding section 7
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-concepts-20130723/#section-generalized-rdf 
>
>
> It does not look like my comments about Generalized RDF were addressed:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Aug/0008.html
> [[
> I think the most appropriate place for the definition of "generalized
> RDF" would be in the RDF Semantics document, for two reasons: (a) that's
> where the notion is actually used (to simplify entailment rules); and
> (b) that would give it less prominence and hence reduce the likelihood
> that someone would think it is a form of standard RDF.
> ]]
>
> Also, I still think it needs a stronger warning that generalized RDF 
> is non-standard.
>
> Also, in Section 7 "A generalized RDF graph is an RDF graph" should be 
> "A generalized RDF graph is a graph", because the whole point is that 
> a *generalized* RDF graph is *not* necessarily a conforming RDF graph.
>

Please note that your comment then, on 4 August 2013, was on the 23 July 
draft:

    http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-concepts-20130723/
    RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax
    W3C Last Call Working Draft 23 July 2013

and that's still the most recent draft for public review.

         -- Sandro

> David
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 03:08:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:58 UTC