W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > May 2009

AW: AW: [Core] Review Core

From: Adrian Paschke <adrian.paschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 13:58:56 +0200
To: "'Christian De Sainte Marie'" <csma@fr.ibm.com>
Cc: "'RIF'" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01a301c9d879$300c3a80$9024af80$@paschke@gmx.de>
Christian,

 

Please find below how I addressed your editorial comments.

 

@Core Editors: Please check if you are fine with the changes which I made.

 

-Adrian

 

 

>There is one that you will not need otake into account, because I remove it: 
> 
>  - Section 1 (Overview): I wonder if, since Import is part of the normative syntax and semantics 
>, we should not make it explicit, and stress it, that Core includes SWC (and that is true for BLD 
> and PRD as well, of course);

 

Ok

 

 

 

>- Beside my usual rant about the presentation syntax (ask anybody who's 

>not spend about 4 years bickering about the RIF presentation syntax to 

>read the first two sentences of section 2: if they understand that the 

>concrete PS is not normative, they must be very clever - well, if they 

>understand anything at all, that is :-)...

 

The presentation syntax is not the same as the EBNF syntax.

Presentation syntax is a superconcept for both mathematical English and EBNF syntax.

It is now explicitly described in section 2.

 

- Beside my usual rant about the presentation syntax, I said, I suggest 
that section 3 be renamed "RIF-Core as a specialisation of RIF-BLD", and 
that section 6 (RIF-Core as a specialisation of RIF-PRD) be moved next to 
it (that is, to become section 3); 

 

I move section 6 before section 3 since it describes the presentation syntax of RIF Core as a specialization of RIF PRD.

 

- I would also move what is currently the first paragraph of section 2 
into the overview (esp. if the section is renamed as suggested);

 

I think the mathematical presentation syntax is important enough to have it here before the section about semnatics and safeness.

 

- talking of section 6 (RIF-Core as a specialisation of RIF-PRD): it might 
be a good idea to point to the section Interoperability in RIF-PRD [1]

 

Done

 

- Sub-sections 2.6.1 to 2.6.3 seem very detailled wrt the rest of the 
document, and esp. the normative parts of it. I suggest removing the 
subsections, mentioning only once the EBNF for RIF-Core presentation 
syntax is a specialisation of RIF-BLD presentation syntax, and append the 
three paragraphs about examples 2-4. Btw, the EBNF for the RIF-Core PS is 
also a specialisation of the EBNF for RIF-PRD PS.

 

Currently, it reflects the modular design of RIF Core consisting of  a condition language, a rule language and a core annotations and the one to one mapping to the corresponding BLD parts can be easily seen. 

I tend to keep that clear structure, also because beside 3 headings and two sentences it will not safe much text.  However, I do not object to your proposal if the other editors also would like to have it less detailed.

 

 

 

 

 

Von: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] Im Auftrag von Christian De Sainte Marie
Gesendet: Dienstag, 19. Mai 2009 10:04
An: Adrian Paschke
Cc: 'RIF'
Betreff: Re: AW: [Core] Review Core

 


********* NOTICE **********
My new email address at IBM is: csma@fr.ibm.com
My ILOG email address will not be forwarded after June 8
*****************************

Hi Adrian,

"Adrian Paschke" <adrian.paschke@gmx.de> wrote on 19/05/2009 01:23:45:
> 
> So far, I have implemented all required changes and will try to 
> address the editorial ones tomorrow. 


There is one that you will not need otake into account, because I remove it: 
> 
>  - Section 1 (Overview): I wonder if, since Import is part of the normative syntax and semantics 
>, we should not make it explicit, and stress it, that Core includes SWC (and that is true for BLD 
> and PRD as well, of course); 

That is not true, of course. Core/BLD/PRD do not include SWC by reference; they refer correctly to other specs, including SWC, for non-RIF import; 

Cheers, 

Christian 


ILOG, an IBM Company
9 rue de Verdun
94253 - Gentilly cedex - FRANCE
Tel. +33 1 49 08 35 00
Fax +33 1 49 08 35 10



Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above:
Compagnie IBM France
Siège Social : Tour Descartes, 2, avenue Gambetta, La Défense 5, 92400 Courbevoie
RCS Nanterre 552 118 465
Forme Sociale : S.A.S.
Capital Social : 609.751.783,30 €
SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 02430
Received on Tuesday, 19 May 2009 11:59:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:08 GMT