W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > March 2001

[PRISM] Dispositions of Dave Beckett's comments

From: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 18:29:52 -0800
To: "'Dave Beckett'" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, "'www-rdf-interest'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Cc: "'spec-comments'" <spec-comments@prismstandard.org>
Message-ID: <006501c0b8c1$4dffe9f0$6501a8c0@interwoven.com>
Hi Dave,

Thanks for the careful comments. Here are the dispositions:


> Overall, I like it; 

Thanks.

> I've a load of DC RDF/XML nits - writing an
> RDF/XML parser, DC and RSS 1.0 applications really makes me notice
> these.

Good. Thanks for the help.

> Looks like the DC/XML draft I edit would be a conformant profile of
> PRISM - http://www.dublincore.org/documents/2000/11/dcmes-xml/

Hmmm, yes, I think it would.

> page 10 section 2.2
>   ...I don't like the new URI scheme ...

Already addressd - see disposition of Dan Connolly's comments.


> page 11 footnote 2
>   'it istrated' => 'it is treated'

Done.

> page 13 section 2.4
>   introduces iso3166-2: scheme.  Wouldn't this be better done as a
>   prism controlled vocabulary?

These are to be controlled vocabulary terms. They just got
identified in ways that people did not like. The ISO 3166-2
region codes, for example, would presumably all have broaderTerm
links to the correct country.

> page 16 section 2.7.1
> 
>   dc namespace URI is wrong here and in many following examples
>   - a must fix.

Oh - I see. A '#' where it should have been a '/'. Well-spotted!
Fixed.

> page 16 section 2.7.2
>   although tempting for authors, maybe admonish them not to try to
>   include &copy; in the <prism:copyright> field - if they really want
>   that, they must use the &#123; form.  I see this in other RDF apps,
>   but this breaks most XML parsers.  I'm confident 123 is the wrong
>   number, but I'll carry on reading rather than look it up now.

&#169; is the entity.

I've put a note about that into the definition of the prism:copyright
element, as well as in the place you suggested.

> page 19 section 2.7.4 last example
>   xml:base with RDF is possibly going to work, but not all XML
>   parsers support this.  This is either an implementation note or
>   maybe you might alter the suggested style to specify full URIs -
>   rather a pain.

I put in a footnote about it.

> 4.8.3
>   Note that although a sequence of <dc:creator> elements in an
>   RDF/XML file implicitly defines a sequence (in the XML world), RDF
>   parsers have no obligation to preserve that ordering, unlike in an
>   rdf:Seq.  So the PRISM RDF profile requires that the ordering be
>   preseved.

Yes, good catch. I have added that suggestion to the profile.

(Now I will have to add some stuff to my implementation to
keep track of that ordering.)

> 4.8.4
>   "the RDF parseType attribute" =>
>   "the <tt>rdf:parseType</tt> attribute"
> 
>   and "value of 'Literal'" => "value of '<tt>Literal</tt>'"

Done.

> Section 5
>   througout there are <tt>dc:blah</tt> and normal dc:blah -
>   need consistency

Changed all to the <tt> style, with no < or > character on the
element types.  (That was a long and tedious task. Yech.)

> 5.2.5
>   Example could have newlines after elements to aid readability
OK

> 5.2.6
>   Dc:format => dc:format
OK

> 5.2.11
>   Example closing element <dc:rights> => </dc:rights>
OK


> 5.3.2
>   ahah, copyright sign appears.  See above
Already handled.


> 
> 5.3.6
>   example
>     extra '</' before </prism:expirationTime>
>   and
>     parseType="resource" => parseType="Resource"
OK.  Sharp eyes, Dave.


> 5.3.16
>   about=>rdf:about
OK

> other things
> 
>   xml:lang I notice appearing once in a description, is that assumed
>   as part of general XML support?
Yes.

Thanks for the detailed comments.

Regards,
Ron
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2001 21:31:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:48 GMT