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

Re: Review of XML-DATA

From: Christian De Sainte Marie <csma@fr.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:14:56 +0200
To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>, public-rif-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFC3BC1CBF.B61BF667-ONC125763F.0064F396-C1257640.0027D2B3@fr.ibm.com>
Hi Dave,

I corrected  the draft wrt your editorial comments. See my own comments 
inlined.

Dave Reynolds wrote on 26/09/2009 14:11:29:
> 
> ** Editorial
> 
> ** Section 1
> 
> [Same hard to parse sentence in para6 that I commented on last time.]
> s/Followingly, this/This/
> s/possible, the corresponding XML schemas/where available the
> corresponding XML schemas,/

Replaced with:
"Accordingly, this document specifies how a RIF document is combined with 
well-formed XML data sources and, where available, the corresponding XML 
schemas, identified using the <tt>rif:Import</tt> construct."

Is that any better?

> Delete para7 ("However, an instance of the data model can be ....") 
> since the rest of the document has dropped the direct mapping from 
> relational tables.

I would prefer not to...

Precisely because it remains the only place where this possibility is 
explicitly mentioned, after the relational table part of the example has 
bee removed.

The paragraph could be removed in a later draft, though, after typical 
usage scenarios have been added in the overview section (one of them being 
to import a non-XML data source, of course :-)

> ** Section 2
> 
> para 2,  s/limited to identify/limited to identifying/

done

> ** Section 3.1
> 
> s/befor ethe/before the/

Corrected by Sandro already :-)

> The order of the definitions of sequence, atomics is awkward. Suggest 
> putting the two definitions of Atomic first, then the definition of 
> Sequence, then the para "A sequence cannot be a member of a sequence 
> ..." then the definition of Document order.

The definitions have been added as I needed them, indeed. So, the order 
may not be the best.

I tried your proposal: let see how it works when we read it tomorrow.

> In the definition of sequence:
>     s/or more items/or more information items/

Right.

> ** Section 3.2
> 
> In 6.  s/represented an/represented by an/

corrected.

> ** Section 4
> 
> para 2,  s/a mean to/a means to/

Corrected (by Sandro).

> ** Section 4.5
> 
> In the first bullet:
>     s/v is the sequence of/v is the list of/
> [sequence is not a defined RIF data structure and later on you give an 
> example which makes it clear you do mean to use RIF lists here]

Right. To make that explicit, I replaced "the sequence of" with "the RIF 
list that contains".
 
> In example 4.6 please leave spaces around the "->" character pairs, the 
> sequence ">->" is hard to read :-)
>
> s/dta source/data source/

done.

> In Example 4.7, the matching string text should, I think, have a space 
> between "Widget" and ".". I'm not sure what whitespace normalization you 

> are assuming here but at least in the input document there is white 
> space between the <item> element and the ".".

You are right. I removed the white space between the <item> and the ".".

> In the Editor's note, s/minOccure/minOccur/
> 
> ** Appendix A
> 
> In Editor's note:
>    s/does not exits/does not exist/
>    s/doe snot/does not/

Done.

Thanx again for the review.

Cheers,

Christian

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, 29 September 2009 07:15:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 29 September 2009 07:15:47 GMT