W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2003

Re: 11/11 Arch doc review - miscellaneous comments

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:50:39 -0500
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1070056239.10519.65.camel@seabright>
On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 19:04, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> Here are my comments on a complete read-through of the
> architecturedocument as of 2003-11-11.

Hi Tim,

Thanks for your comments. Below are my comments about the
pieces I did not incorporate into the soon-to-appear 28 Nov
draft. I either incorporated the other pieces or they
were subsumed by discussion at the ftf meeting in Japan.

 _ Ian

> The very first paragraph of the Abstract encapsulates the fact that
> wehaven't solved httpRange-14 yet.  It uses the word "resource" in
> twodistinct ways.

The last remaining editor's note in the document is about
rewriting the abstract; I haven't made any real changes there
as I imagine we'll continue to discuss it.

> 2.6.2 Determination that two URIs identify
> 
> could we change "determination" to "expression", please?  We
> In the same section, change "equaivalentTo" to "sameAs".  The OWLvocab
> is now current, and this changed from DAML.
> 
> In the same para, change "state assert" to "directly state
> orindirectly imply"

Instead, I deleted "funtionalProperty". Do you think it should go
back in? I thought one example might suffice..

> 4 Data Formats
> 
> You note that "language", "data format" and "vocabulary" are
> usedinterchangeably.  I hope that "vocabulary" isn't.  I would say
> thatsome
> data formats are languages, but a vocabulary is different.
> As far as I understand the way we tend to use these words, here is
> mybash at explaining it in case it useful maybe for a glossary some
> day.
> 
> Data format
> 
> Constrained syntax for a series of bits, and an
> accompanyingspecification of how such series should be interpreted.
> Examples: PNG,Plain text, OFX, HTML, RDF, HTTP request, HTTP response
> 
> Language
> 
> Constrained syntax for a series of (normally) characters
> (normallyencoded as a series of bits), and a specification of what
> such seriesmean. Examples; OFX, RDF, HTTP request, HTTP response.
> 
> (I don't see any use in belaboring the difference, mind you, exceptfor
> connecting onto other people's ideas. Note that things inlangauges
> have meaning, when data formats often are just presented toa user, who
> then determines any meaning in other ways. Also, languagesare normally
> defined in terms of characters, so an encoding stepexists between the
> data format and the language. XML is a data formatas it specifies a
> bits as well as the characters.)
>
> Vocabulary:
> 
> A set of terms which may be used for specific places in the grammar
> ofa given language. Examples:     FOAF RDF ontology; SOAP HTTP
> headers.
> RDF and HTTP headers define places where the grammar has an open setof
> terms which can be added to. These sets are vocabularies.

I did not include these definitions. I did remove "vocabularly"
from the list (leaving "language" and "format"). Let me know if
you think that we should add the definitions you provided. 

-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447

Received on Friday, 28 November 2003 17:50:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:22 GMT