W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2007

Typos/editorial in <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/rq25.html>

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:02:23 +0000
Message-Id: <862D8645-FE2A-4E64-97B0-9837F984AFD1@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: dawg mailing list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

I hope this is the right one.

I don't know if I'm going to be able to scare up a full review either  
now or during LC (my crushedness continues...worse). And I afraid  
I've not been monitoring anything, so some of this may be redundant.  
If lucky, I may be able to get an "prototype implementation" based  
review going in short time frame. For that, I would like to know  
which bits are canonical and which can be ignored. My intuitions say  
11, 12, and appendix A. If that's right, please let me know.

"""12.1.5 Graph Pattern"""
the definition has no links, though other definitions do have links.  
Not sure what the policy is.

""""12.1.6 Solution Modifiers
Definition: Graph Pattern
A solution sequence modifier is one of:""""

s/Definition: Graph Pattern/Definition: Solution Modifiers/

Throughout 12:
	"comprised of" <-- I suspect the tide has turned on this but it's  
still one of my pet peeves :) "comprised" means "is composed of".

Ah yes:
"The traditional rule states that the whole comprises the parts and  
the parts compose the whole. In strict usage: The Union comprises 50  
states. Fifty states compose (or constitute or make up) the Union.  
Even though careful writers often maintain this distinction, comprise  
is increasingly used in place of compose, especially in the passive:  
The Union is comprised of 50 states. Our surveys show that opposition  
to this usage is abating. In the 1960s, 53 percent of the Usage Panel  
found this usage unacceptable; in 1996, only 35 percent objected. See  
Usage Note at include.""|

But c'mon. "composed of" is better. "comprised" works. Pleeeeease?!

"""12.2.1 Mapping Graph Patterns
The result of mapping a SPARQL query is a SPARQL abstract query that  
uses theses symbols for graph patterns:"""

I don't understand "that uses theses symbols for graph patterns".

Ok, taking too much time in digging into the translation. Sorry.


For the record, I think 12.6 may be better off in an appendix or a WG  
submission, but I'll send a separate message when i get a chance.

Appendix B says nothing about the answers required by an evaluation  
of a query against a dataset, which, to me, is a critical aspect of  
conformance. Given some of the tricky things abounding, some guidance  
here would be welcome.

Shouldn't Appendix D be dropped? or <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/ 
DataAccess/rq23/sparql-defns.html> updated?


Received on Monday, 26 February 2007 21:02:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:53 UTC