W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: minor errors in WD-rdf-primer-20030905

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 09:53:10 -0500
Message-ID: <3FA66BD6.3010907@acm.org>
To: Sven.Hartrumpf@fernuni-hagen.de
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, em@w3.org

Sven--

Sorry for the delay in responding to this message.  Thanks very much for 
the detailed review.  I've generally accepted these as editorial changes 
to the Primer (except as noted below, where I have some comments), and 
will make the appropriate changes.

--Frank

Sven.Hartrumpf@fernuni-hagen.de wrote:

> Hi all.
> 
> Here are some small errors:
> 
> made affect ->
> may affect
> 
> property interpret ->
> properly interpret


This last one was fixed in the 10 October last call version.


> 
> may not used ->
> may not be used
> 
> as normatively defined in ->
> are normatively defined in
> 
> provides no additional meaning that such a program can directly use ->
> ? the object referred to by "such a program" is unclear and very remote
> 
> month, day, and year ->
> (illogical order; I know: some don't like logic :-) )


This is the way Americans write dates;  it has nothing to do with logic! 
  I fear that a certain amount of tolerance for the linguistic 
peculiarities of strange languages (like American) is going to be 
necessary in applying RDF :-)  All the more reason to explicitly 
identify the various components!

Slightly more seriously, this refers to the components of the 
exterms:creation-date property in a previous example, and the components 
are written in month, day, and year order ("August 16, 1999").


> 
> later in this section). ->
> later in this section.)
> 
> in explaining the example). ->
> in explaining the example.)


Regarding these last two, these parenthetical remarks are not intended 
to be *independent* sentences, even though they have the form of 
complete sentences, and hence the punctuation goes outside the 
parentheses.  The alternative is to not only make the changes you 
suggest, but also to capitalize the first word of the parenthetical 
remark, and insert another period to complete the previous sentence. 
I'd just as soon leave these alone, if you can stand it.

--Frank


> 
> Greetings
> Sven
> 
Received on Monday, 3 November 2003 09:28:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:33 GMT