W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2011

Review of Service Description Draft

From: Nico Michaelis <nico.michaelis@sohard.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:18:37 +0100
Message-ID: <4D2EC36D.4030007@sohard.de>
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
This is a reply to ACTION-356.

I noticed some issues, although I have not yet found anything serious.

Major issues:
* There is no comment on vendor specific extensions to the description.
Maybe they should be encouraged, noting that orthogonal namespaces must
be used?
* There is no way to characterise parameters taken by a function
described by sd:extensionFunction .
* Section 4 (Example): An URL in the sd namespace appears that is not
defined in the document (sd:ScalarFunction). In older drafts
sd:ScalarFunctions appears but it has been dropped.

Also the namespace scovo appears without noting that it is used for
statistical information or where to find more information about it (the
where question also applies to the voiD). We should link them. Moreover
I think that the example prefix should point to
http://example.org/example# and not to "http://example/"; See RFC 2606.

We should extend the example. How about sd:supportedLangugage
sd:SPARQL11Query and sd:resultFormat statements?

Minor issues:
At some points I found some minor mistakes or some complex language
constructions which should be simplified for clarification - see
suggestions below.

* Abstract after @discovering: missing comma?
* Abstract @2nd sentence: Such ... which : Complex -> I would replace
that with "Using such a description" a client or end user ...
* Introduction @1st sentence: "is a way of describing": Complex -> "lists"
* Introduction @1st sentence and many times throughout the document:
"made available via the SPARQL Protocol" -> Isn't that superfluous? I
think we can drop that phrase most of everywhere.
* Introduction @1st sentence and many times throughout the document:
"service description" -> appears in different flavours; in capital
letters when preceded by "SPARQL", otherwise in lower-case. I think we
should either stick to one formulation or use capitals throughout.
* Accessing a SD: the serialisations are not linked.
* 3.2.2 @1st: language -> languages
* 3.2.4 @1st: aggregate operation -> aggregate function - that's how
they are called in the Query Doc.
* 3.3 @1st: here -> above ?
* 3.4.8 following the listing of subPropertyOf and domain is a sentence
that repeats the listing - that doesn't occur anywhere else.
* @@ some editor notes still in there.

   Nico
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 09:19:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:45 GMT