W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > January 2004

Re: editorial corrections to Primer PR

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:20:08 -0500
Message-ID: <40031D98.8060504@acm.org>
To: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

Graham--

Thanks for the review.  Some comments below.

--Frank

Graham Klyne wrote:

> I've just looked through Frank's proposed changes w.r.t. [1] and agree 
> that they are (a) editorial, and (b) desirable.  (With a clarification 
> about fig 18.)
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-primer-20031010/
> 
> At 17:33 09/01/04 -0500, Frank Manola wrote:
> 
>> I've just made a pass through the Primer PR and have discovered a few 
>> editorial nits that should be corrected:
>>
>> *  in the TOC, sections 5.1 and 5.2 need to have "Defining" replaced 
>> by "Describing" to be consistent with the actual section titles.
> 
> 
> Agree.
> 
> 
>> *  in Section 2.2, there are two instances of "example.com" that need 
>> to be changed to "example.org" to be consistent with the overall example
> 
> 
> I only saw one, but I agree that .org would be more consistent.
> 


There are really two, but they're hard to find (which is why I'm having 
to correct them now!)


> 
>> *  in Section 3.3, there's an "is" in the last sentence that should be 
>> "are".
> 
> 
> It's not clear to me which way this should be, but I agree it's minor 
> editorial.


Now that you mention it, I think I'm going to leave this the way it is 
(the *real* problem is my convoluted sentence structure, but I'm going 
to leave *that* alone!)


> 
> 
>> *  in Section 5.1, Figure 18 is upside down (class MotorVehicle should 
>> be at the top, not the bottom).  This was fixed early last year in 
>> response to a comment from PPS, but somehow an earlier version of the 
>> figure got loaded into TR space and I missed it.  This is just a 
>> matter of re-uploading the corrected figure.
> 
> 
> Then the arrows should point upwards?  Then I agree this is just editorial.


Yes, the arrows should point upwards.  The subClass hierarchy is exactly 
the same;  PPS's comment was that people are used to class diagrams 
having the more general classes at the top.
Received on Monday, 12 January 2004 17:22:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 9 December 2014 23:04:05 UTC