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

Re: completed comments on concepts doc

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:39:04 +0100
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-id: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDAEIMCAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


Hi Brian

I just wanted to pick up on the purple bits - all mine.

1: URI Ref
The URI Ref section is a mess - I tried to fix it and failed and reverted to
the previously published version that you've dissected.

For this publication, in your opinion, would it suffice to note that this
section is currently inadequate in the detail but captures the main intent;
or would you like me to have another go at making sense of it.

2: predicate *RDF* URI Reference
  accept

3: Graph Equality
  largely reject - change to
Two RDF graphs are equal if and only if they are isomorphic, as follows.

rationale:
  - your term Graph Equality Isomorphism is ugly.
  - standard usage is that XXX isomorphism preserves the structure of XXX.
   thus an RDF Graph isomorphism preserves the structure of an RDF Graph.
   This standard usage (largely) depends on a defn of an XXX isomorphism for
each XXX.
   "respects" has a well-established meaning when discussing isomorphisms
and does not further clarification. FYI it indicates that the structure is
unaffected by the bijection.
 If i is the isomorphism then i respects arc labels if and only if for any
arc a and any label l, l labels a <=> l labels i(a).


4: Charmod
(Not sure why this is purple ... I suppose this will be a substantive change
at last call).
As it says in the doc, Charmod is currently in last call, and, upon
examination of the I18N web site appears to be stalled awaiting advancement
of IRI-draft, which appears to be stalled since its author is too busy in
IRI-advocacy mode on the tag!
I am intending to formally propose the deletion of this para straight after
this publication. I feel that it is better to leave it in now so that when
we get last call comments from I18N about what happened to thbe early
uniform normalization (that is mentioned in M&S) we point to this WD.

The failure of the I18N people to advance charmod really leaves us little
choice here.



Jeremy

PS Didn't you have any comments on the changelog?
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 09:40:08 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:33 EDT