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

[RESOLVED] Re: Your comments on RDF Semantics - ISSUE-159

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 15:13:38 -0400
Message-ID: <52697162.4070709@dbooth.org>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>, "public-rdf-comments@w3.org Comments" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
I am satisfied with this resolution.

Thanks!
David

On 10/24/2013 02:03 PM, Pat Hayes wrote:
> David, the Semantics document now has the text marked up in the way that you requested, as a definition.
>
> Pat
>
> On Oct 22, 2013, at 7:58 PM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>
>> David, you didn't get a response from me on this:
>>
>>> ISSUE-159 is almost satisfactory.  I emailed Pat Hayes off list about this, and have not yet seen a response:
>>> [[
>>> [Off list]
>>>
>>> Hi Pat,
>>>
>>> That looks good except that the font on the word "interpretation" is
>>> wrong: it is not appearing in bold as other defined terms appear when
>>> they are introduced.
>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-mt/index.html#notation-and-terminology
>>>
>>> Could you please fix that so that I can send back my official response
>>> saying that I am happy with this resolution?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>> ]]
>>
>>
>> because I never got that message :-). Now I have it, my response is as follows.
>>
>> The fonts are assigned by ReSpec depending upon the content markup. This is not marked as a definition. As the text states, all the definitions are given subsequent to this paragraph. There are no internal hyperlinks to this paragraph; all internal links from any use of "interpretation" would go to the appropriate definition of simple interpretation, RDF interpretation, etc.. If this were marked as a definition, then all these links would redirect to here rather than where they should redirect to.
>>
>> I am not sure if this is still an official correspondence, but as it is CCd to public-rdf-comments, let us treat it as one. Please reply to public-rdf-comments indicating whether you find this resolution of ISSUE-159, with my added explanation, above, acceptable.
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 home
>> 40 South Alcaniz St.            (850)202 4416   office
>> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
>> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile (preferred)
>> phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 home
> 40 South Alcaniz St.            (850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile (preferred)
> phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 24 October 2013 19:14:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 24 October 2013 19:14:06 UTC