Re: review of current status of the "What's New" document (ACTION-330)

Thanks, Peter. 

I generally agree, but am curious why you think this Note shouldn't mention Skolemization. 

Regards,
Dave
--
http://about.me/david_wood


> On Nov 27, 2013, at 12:32, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The document isn't nearly finished, so this cannot be a complete review.
> 
> 
> Suggestion for important changes list:
> - named graphs
> - plain literals
> - datatypes
> - new syntaxes
> That's all!  Note, nothing from semantics.
> 
> 
> There are several places where the document has too much, or misleading, information.
> 
> - The paragraph saying the section is about Concepts is misleading and should be removed.
> 
> - The paragraph saying that Concepts is definitional only.  This is not a change, and even if it was, there is no need to talk about that here.  The paragraph should be removed
> 
> - Rewrite the new syntax paragraph to something like:
>  RDF 1.1. introduces a number of new serialization formats. RDF/XML is no longer the only recommended serialization format and should be allowed to die a deserved death.   The import of an RDF document is carried by the RDF graph (or RDF dataset) that results from the document.
> 
> - The paragraph on DOM madness should read something like:
>   Planned updates ... rdf:HTML.  DOM version 4 is needed to clarify functionality ... formats. The unfinished status of ....
> 
> - Generalized RDF should not be mentioned here.
> 
> - Skolemization should not be mentioned here.
> 
> The paragraph on datatypes should say that rdf:XMLLiteral support is optional.
> 
> 
> 
> The Semantics section is copied from my message to implementers.  It carries too much information and duplicates some of the stuff from before.
> 
> The paragraphs starting "Literals", "There is", and "The rdf:XMLLiteral" can all be removed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More when the rest of the document shows up.
> 
> 
> peter
> 
>