W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > June 2001

RE: Issue http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-editorial

From: <Ora.Lassila@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 09:42:06 -0500
Message-ID: <B9CFA6CE8FFDD211A1FB0008C7894E460417FEFA@bseis01nok>
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Additionally I wanted to say that I don't think any of this belongs to the
errata document, this is merely stuff people got confused about when reading
the spec. We will fix this when then next version of the spec is edited.

	- Ora

--
Ora Lassila, mailto:ora.lassila@nokia.com, +1 (781) 993-4603
Research Fellow, Nokia Research Center / Boston

> ----------
> From: 	ext Ora Lassila
> Sent: 	Friday, June 1, 2001 6:46
> To: 	w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: 	Issue
> http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-editorial
> 
> Some thoughts on how to fix the issues under "rdfms-editorial: General
> editorial comments"
> (http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-editorial):
> 
> Issue: parseType="Resource"
> 
> It has been suggested that an example would make the spec clearer on the
> usage of parseType="Resource". We can simply add a reference to a later
> example (namely, the one at the end of Section 7.3). I would also reword
> the bit about other values of parseType to read "Other values of
> parseType are reserved for future versions and extensions of RDF" (as
> opposed to "future specifications"; "extensions" takes care of what we
> did in DAML with parseType="daml:collection").
> 
> Issue: the "v namespace" prefix
> 
> In the spec's examples we use several "fictional" namespaces, and mostly
> they are undeclared. Given that we now have several well established
> namespaces (e.g., DC & RSS), we can cosnsistently use some of those
> throughout the spec. We should also declare namespaces in every example
> (personally, I think at least in every example which has an "rdf:RDF"
> element, as a convention).
> 
> As has been pointed out, "description.org" specifically is not a good
> "sample" URI since this is a real domain belonging to an organization
> promoting more research for Retinitis Pigmentosa. Again, let's use
> "real" URIs.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 	- Ora
> 
> -- 
> Ora Lassila  mailto:daml@lassila.org  http://www.lassila.org/
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 1 June 2001 10:42:37 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:37:01 EDT