Re: super easy issues: ISSUE-93, ISSUE-94, ISSUE-95

Hi all,

Regarding proposed resolutions to ISSUE-93, ISSUE-94, ISSUE-95 (but  
*not* 96) described in [1], I see +1 from Manu [2], Michael [3], and  
Mark [4], so I'm marking these RESOLVED.

Mark/Shane, can you take appropriate action on the editors' draft?

As a reminder, here are the resolutions:

> ==============
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/93
>
> In Section 5.5, processing rule 4, it says "If no URI is provided by a
> resource attribute, then..."
>
> This is a little confusing, since we of course have an attribute named
> "resource".  What is meant is "If no new subject URI is obtained via
> these rules, then..."  I hope, anyway.
> ==============
>
>
> ==============
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/94
>
> In section 5.5 Sequence, processing rule 13 (really rule 12) it says  
> "a
> value of 'true' should be returned from this level of processing.
> Otherwise a value of false should be returned."
>
> Two things:
>
> 1) change false to 'false' or change 'true' to true.
> 2) change should to MUST.  This section is normative, and that is a
> conformance requirement.  The use of "should" is polite, but not  
> what is
> intended I think.
> ==============
>
>
> ==============
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/95
>
> Section 5.4 paragraph 3 reads:
> "For example, the full URI for Albert Einstein on DPPedia is:"
>
> It should of course be
> "For example, the full URI for Albert Einstein on DBPedia is:"
> ==============


-Ben

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0040.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0072.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0074.html
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0085.html

Received on Friday, 21 March 2008 03:28:07 UTC