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

Re: pls add anchor for "semantic extensions"

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:43:28 -0600
Message-Id: <p06001f05bbd97b003956@[10.1.31.1]>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, Brian_McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

>Reading from
>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/#rdf_entail
>
>I see stuff like "Semantic extensions MAY limit the formal
>interpretations of these vocabularies to conform to these intended
>meanings."
>
>That's a conformance clause; i.e. it suggests somebody
>can say "banana-ML is a semantic extension to RDF".
>When they do so, it's nice if they can link to a
>defining anchor for that term.
>
>I don't see one. Pat, I suggest you make one. Perhaps
>this one:
>
>"Semantic extensions of RDF are constrained in this recommendation using
>the keywords MUST , MUST NOT, SHOULD and MAY of [RFC 2119]."

There is an anchor at the beginning of that paragraph (para 7 in 
section 0.1, beginning "Particular uses of RDF, ..."):

#DefSemanticExtension

and in the latest version (2.6,  just done today) I have added the anchor

#RDFSemanticExtension

one sentence before the point you suggest, ie at "Extensions or dialects..."


>Conformance clauses need to be backed by implementation
>experience in a request for PR. I suppose we have some,
>in OWL.

Yup. And DAML, for that matter.

Pat

>--
>Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2003 13:43:29 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thursday, 13 November 2003 13:43:33 EST