W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > June 2003

Semantics review: body

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 18:40:42 +0300
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200306181840.42928.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


This is a review of

http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDF_Semant_Edit_append.html

excluding all the appendices, and the issue of XMLLiteral

a) changelog

you credit peter with the list of prohibited datatypes. That list in fact was 
generated by me, as part of this groups work ...
no change suggested.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Nov/att-0092/02-index

b) status of this doc
this will change ...

c) 0.1 para 6, "This documents gives two versions ..."
suggest insert new para mentioning closure rules at this point.

d) 0.1 para 8 "indicated THUS" is ugly to me. Conventionally to show your 
notation the style would be:
"using the keywords MUST, SHOULD, MAY of [RFC 2119]" (but you have to list all 
the keywords you use, do you use MUST NOT?)
I prefer the last call text 

e) 0.3 "equal" concerning graphs

see
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#danc-01
suggest use of word "equivalent" (three occurrences)

f) 0.3 penulitmate para suggest replacing "indistinguishable" by "equivalent" 
(or "equal" if not following (e) )

g) 0.3 last para suggest replacing "'accidentally' merged" with 
"'accidentally' identified"

h) 2 3rd para
suggest delete
"However, validity represents the best guarantee that any assertional language 
can offer: if given true inputs, it will never draw a false conclusion from 
them."
(it leads into ratholes - deletion is only a suggestion.)

i) 2 
suggest replace
"the most efficient"
by
"an efficient"

j) oops an XMLLiteral comment
  3 third para
"The relevant concepts are fully described"
suggest
"This datatype is fully described"

k) 3.2 first para
"Semantic extensions MAY ..."

suggest adding an entry to the change log such as
"Generalized some of the provisions of the last call WD to permit appropriate 
semantic extensions on all non-logical RDF vocabulary"

(this seems a substantive change, which I support)

l) 3.2.1 
after aaa bbb ccc .
suggest space between
"means.Note"

m) 3.2.3 third para
"Clearly, any such graph amounts to an assertion that the collection, and all 
its sub-collections, exist,"

- suggest delete "Clearly" it usually indicates an error
- suggest delete "and all its sub-collections"
   [a] is a subcollection of [a,b] and the "clear" statement is false

(In fact noting the use of "clearly" later in the appendices I perhaps ought 
to apply the first point to find further bugs :) )

n) 4 last para before 4.1
"section 3.4 below"
3.4 is not below ...
(no suggestion - I haven't tried to work out which section you mean)

o) 5) both before and after 1. 2. 3. 
    "assume"
  why "assume"

  Suggest
  Formally, a datatype d is defined by 

could also link to concepts #section-Datatypes (section 5) which says the same 
thing.

p) new list of XSD datatypes
   hmmm ...
  We should ask XML Schema WG to review this.

q)
"Datatype clashes and assertions that ill-typed literals are of type 
rdfs:Literal are the only inconsistencies recognized by this model theory. "

are you sure - this sentence looks like a hostage to fortune, but I tend to 
agree with it.

r) para before 5.1
"A natural datatype map is a smallest datatype map which makes all the 
datatyping triples logically true."
suggest delete - the terms don't make enough sense a map making triples 
logically true. it is not clear enough which datatyping triples you are 
talking about, anbd the paragraph works without this sentence










 
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2003 12:40:49 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:56 EDT