W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2002

New RDF document - proposed reassignment of material

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 18:30:35 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020702175106.03d134b0@joy.songbird.com>
To: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

This message constitutes my action from Friday's telecon.

In constructing this, I've focused on reassignment of material that (to me) 
is clearly desirable, in light of the working documents that currently exist.

These suggestions are offered with respect to this document:
http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-basics/2002-06-27/Overview.htm


Section 2.3.1:  I note that this text has been taken from the Primer, and 
seems to be more appropriate as part of a definitive document than the 
primer.  The corresponding section 7.1 might be removed from the primer.

Section 4 (graph syntax):  I have wondered if all this wouldn't better 
belong in the formal semantics document, but tend to the view not, because 
the graph syntax is the common element that relates the other major 
documents (formal semantics, RDF/XML syntax and primer).

Section 5:  I think much this material could be merged into the RDF 
vocabulary/schema document.  The introduction to section 5 is intended to 
reflect the comments in section 2 about the social context of using RDF, 
and might be incorporated into section 2.3 of this document.

Section 5.1:  (This was from the original M&S.)  Move to vocabulary/schema 
document.  I think a very slight expansion/explanation of the content 
already there in section "RDF Container Classes and Properties" would cover 
this.

Section 5.1.1:  I think this belongs in the Primer.

Section 5.2 (reification vocab):  I think this belongs in the 
vocabulary/schema document.   The individual terms are already mentioned 
there, but I think a sentence about using them together might be useful, 
and also the kind of purpose they may serve.

Section 5.3 (label, comment):  is already covered by the vocabulary/schema 
document, and can be dropped.

Section 5.4 (seeAlso, definedBy):  I think this belongs in the 
vocabulary/schema document.  Mostly, it is already there, but we've added 
some words adapted from the F2F meeting log.

Section 5.5 (rdf:value):  is already covered by the vocabulary/schema 
document, and can be dropped.

Sections 6.1 and 6.2:  these are specific to the XML syntax, and might 
belong in the RDF syntax document.  The syntax document seems (to me) to be 
aimed more at parser writers than information designers, so there might be 
a case for keeping section 6.2 where it is less likely to be overlooked by 
non parser writers -- I think this could sit comfortable in the primer.

Sections 6.4, 6.5:  similar comments to 6.2;  this material might better 
belong in the primer.




-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2002 13:15:02 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:49:48 EDT