W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > July 2008

[RIF] BLD comments, on 7/23 snapshot

From: Stella Mitchell <cleo@us.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:33:16 -0400
To: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFEC4C922B.BAAE7E71-ON85257491.0000F385-85257492.0065EC79@us.ibm.com>
Hi Harold and Michael,

BLD looks quite good. I included some comments below.

Stella


Comments:
----------------
 In syntax, BLD defines an import profile to be a TERM and says that the 
 semantics of 2-argument Import is given in SWC. SWC says "We note here 
that
 in the RIF-BLD profiles can be arbitrary terms.  Here we are concerned 
only with the
 restricted case that profiles are IRI constants."   So, is the semantics 
of 2-argument
imports for BLD adequately covered in SWC?

Abstract:
    Last sentence:
         isn't it more accurate to say:
           "The XML serialization syntax of RIF-BLD is specified via a 
mapping from 
              the presentation syntax and with XML Schema." 
              --or --
           "The XML serialization syntax of RIF-BLD is specified via a 
mapping from
             the presentation syntax. A normative XML schema is also 
provided."
 
Section 2:
    1st para, 4th sentence:
           This syntax --> The presentation syntax
            (because the sentence about math english is in between, and
              so the reference may not be clear)
 
Section 2.5
       2nd bullet: 
            1st sub bullet:
                1st sentence says there is one subset per arity. There 
could be two, right? 
                 --for external and not external. The 2nd sub bullet may 
be intended to further 
                 refine the first sub bullet, but I don't think it's 
clear. 
                 The second sentence of the 1st sub-bullet is not part of 
the defintion, right, 
                  but is a consequence of the first sentence and the 
defintion of arity?

                 what about:
                  -- A number of subsets for predicate symbols such that:
                        -- There is a separate subset for each symbol 
arity. Note that, based on 
                            the definition of arity, this means that 
positional and named-argument
                            predicate symbols are in different subsets.
                        -- The symbols for externally defined predicates 
are in separate subsets
                            from the other predicate symbols.

                                or

                  -- A number of subsets for predicate symbols such that:
                        -- The symbols in each subset share the same 
arity, and external predicate
                             symbols are in separate subsets from other 
predicate symbols. Note 
                             that, based on the definition of arity, this 
means that positional and named-
                             argument predicate symbols are in different 
subsets.

     add a blank line between 2nd and 3rd bullets of partitioning section, 
and update
     heading of 3rd bullet to same form as heading of 2nd bullet.

     Definition (Imported document)
          maybe add a note calling attention to the fact that  only 
one-argument 
          import directives are considered here.
 
Section 3.3
    1st para
          before applying the truth valuation,TVali, in the next section. 
-->
          before applying the truth valuation, TVali, defined in the next 
section.

Section 3.6
    2nd para:
         From now on --> For the purposes of this definition ?

         is the document of phi --> is the document of formula phi
             (because this is the first mention of phi in this section)

Section 5
    subsection "RIF-BLD specific clauses"
          I think a few sentences above this subsection saying what it is 
         about, or for, would be helpful.
 
          2nd bullet:
                "A conformant RIF-BLD consumer is a conformant BLDt,e 
consumer if T..."
                 -->
                "A conformant RIF-BLD consumer is a conformant BLDt,e 
consumer in which T..." 
                    (i think it makes it more clear that  BLD consumer is 
being defined in 
                      terms of BLDt,e consumer)
 
                are specified in the RIF-DTB --> are specified in RIF-DTB
 
                externally defined terms --> externally defined functions 
and predicates ?
                      (it's written like that in most other places)
 
Section 6.1   (list numbering and lettering below is as in the wiki 
version)
       item #2 (assignment of signatures)
            sub item  d:
                   do there need to be separate signatures for externally 
defined
                   functions and predicates? Signatures are supposed to 
match
                   up with contexts, and section 2.5 defines separate 
contexts
                   for external symbols.
 
                  2nd para of sub item d:
                      "of one particular arity or with certain argument 
names"
                            --> according to the definition of arity in 
section 2.5, 
                                 "of one particular arity"  would be 
enough here?
                                  (because it covers "with certain 
argument names")
 
                       "externally defined function...or an externally 
defined predicate symbol"
                             -->  add "symbol" after function or remove 
from after predicate. 

            sub item h
                        predicate names or function symbols -->
                        predicate or function symbols 

       item #3 (Supported types of terms)
              "in order to keep BLD relatively compact" 
                   say compact in what aspect - to keep the definition 
compact?

       item #4 (Required symbol spaces)
                requires the following symbols spaces defined in... -->
                requires the symbols spaces defined in...
                      (they're not actually listed in following text)

       item #8 (Supported formulas)
                1st sub bullet
                   "A RIF-BLD condition is an atomic formula, a 
conjunctive or
                    disjunctive combination of atomic formulas with 
optional
                    existential quantification of variables, or..."
                     -->
                   "A RIF-BLD condition is an atomic formula with optional 

                    existential quantification of variables, a conjunctive 
or 
                    disjunctive combination of atomic formulas with 
optional
                    existential quantification of variables, or..." 

Section 6.2
     2nd para:
         lists the parameters of the semantic framework, which one need
         to specialize
         -->
         lists the parameters of the semantic framework that can be 
         specialized.
               (or if not the above, then:  which one need --> which one 
needs)

Section 6.4
        precisely those datatypes and externals, which are specified in 
-->
        precisely the datatypes and externals specified in -->


Other wording:
-------------------
Overview:
     2nd bullet:
          last occurrence of "RIF framework for logic dialects" doesn't 
match the
          capitalization of the other occurrences in the spec  (which have 
Logic and
          Dialects capitalized)

    Example 1:
         rather than store any of them --> rather then store them

         from sell relationships (e.g., stored as facts, as exemplified
         by the second line):
         -->
         from sell relationships that are stored as facts (e.g. as in 
         the second item in the Group below).

Section 2.1
     3rd to last para:
           are used in abridged representations of IRIs -->
           enable abridged representions of IRIs.

    3rd to last para:
           remove "symbol: from before Document and Group, or
           add it before Import

Section 2.2
     last para:
          and, as a special case, can be variables -->
          and so, as a special case, can be variables 

          last sentence:
              remove the parens (but keep the sentence)

Section 2.3
     Definition (Formula)
          item 2, last sentence:
             premises --> premises (bodies)
                 (because in the following rest of the doc, sometimes
                   premise is used and sometimes body).

          item 4:
              among variables ?V1...?Vn in the quantifiation part -->
              among the variables ?V1...?Vn
                (it's written like that in item 5, and reads better)

       para after the numbered list:
             In this definition, --> In the definition of Formula,

Section 2.4
     1st para:
           term/formula --> term or formula

           last sentence:
               The sentence begins "In particular" and ends
               "and so on,"  which is not a good combination.
               How about: "This means that it may..."

Section 2.6
      1st para:
            we have been using --> we have used

      1st bullet:
            last sentence:
                 remove the parens and put a colon between the preceding 
                 sentence and this one.

Section 2.6.1
      3rd para:
          represents an identifier of the symbol space -->
          represents the identifier of the symbol space

Section 3.2
      para just before "The effect of datatypes"
          well formed --> well-formed

     last para:
          are not datatypes mentioned in DTS --> are not datatypes 
included in DTS

Section 4
     2nd para:
           by EBNF and XML Schema --> by EBNF or XML Schema

Section 4.3.2
      1st para:
            dealt with -> handled 
Received on Saturday, 26 July 2008 18:34:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:52 GMT