W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > September 2002

RE: Guide: review - boring (this review not the guide)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 30 Sep 2002 22:00:27 -0500
To: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com>
Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1033441228.14910.348.camel@dirk>

On Mon, 2002-09-30 at 18:55, Smith, Michael K wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Jeremy.  I appreciate the detailed read.  Invaluable help.
> 
> Those suggestions not mentioned below, and they were numerous, I
> fixed per your recommendation.
> 
> - Mike
> 
> > Summary: Mike's spellchequer needs to have an RDF/XML mode.
> 
> YES!  Please send one ASAP.

http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/

> > History section - move to appendix?
> 
> TBD
> 
> > SubclassOf is the fundamental
> > sp: <code>subClassOf</code> even at the beginning of sentence?
> 
> Modfied, but this is one of those things I vacillate on.  Anyone know
> what the approved English usage is?

hmm... I wonder if that's treated in the (in-development) manual
of style...
http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/

no, I don't see any specific guidance. I agree with Jeremy, meanwhile,
though usually the best thing is to reword the sentence so the
keyword is not the first word.


> > <owl:Thing rdf:about="VIN:CENTRAL-COAST-LOCATION">
> >   <type rdf:resource="VIN:CALIFORNIA-REGION"/>
> > </owl:Thing>
> 
> The raw 'type' was a typo.
> 
> I have been somewhat confused about namespace usage as define by
> RDF/XML (as you can tell).  I will fix these.  
> 
> It is still not 100% clear to me how this works.  There are a number
> of things that seem to be permitted syntactically, that don't seem to
> have an interpretation.  I am probably missing a restriction
> somewhere.
> 
>  rdf:ID="VIN:FOO"     (IDsymbol is an XML Name.)
> 
> Where is this ruled out?

"The Namespaces in XML Recommendation [XML Names] assigns a meaning to
names containing colon characters. Therefore, authors should not use the
colon in XML names except for namespace purposes, but XML processors
must accept the colon as a name character."
  -- http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#sec-common-syn



>  Or is it permitted and if so what does it
> mean?
> 
>  rdf:about="FOO"      (rel_path)
>  rdf:about="FOO#BOO"  (rel_path + fragment)
>  rdf:about="VIN:FOO"  (absolute URI with opaque part)
> 
> While the URI document (http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2396.txt)
> refers to the prefix as a scheme, it is not clear to me how/where
> scheme-ness is checked.  Where are these URI's ruled out by RDF?  Or
> are they permitted?

Syntactically, they're permitted.  VIN:FOO is a perfectly
well-formed URI.

I did some writing on this recently...

=====
excerpt from
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/ures14

What is a URI?

It's a string of characters, starting with scheme: . e.g.

    * http://www.w3.org/
    * ftp://ftp.w3.org/
    * irc://irc.openprojects.net/rdfig
    * urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:assertion
    * tel:+1-913-555-1212

See RFC2396 for details.

I didn't know there were URIs for IRC channels and telephones; what
other URI schemes are there?

acap, cid, data, etc. IANA keeps a list of registered URI schemes.


Can I make up a URI scheme? is myscheme:blort a URI?

Well, myscheme:blort meets the syntactic constraints of RFC2396, so yes,
it's a URI. But myscheme isn't registered, so you don't have license to
use that URI in any Internet protocols; there aren't any valid uses of
it. You can't expect anybody to know what you mean by it, and you aren't
guaranteed that somebody else isn't already using it for something else.
But we're getting ahead of ourselves, into the relationship of URIs to
resources...

If you want to register a new scheme, follow the IETF process, esp the
guidelines in RFCNNNN@@.
========

> This is a problem we are going to encounter.  The RDF syntax
> definition is spread across 3 documents.  Ours will presumably be
> across 4.  While I know this is part of the wonderful distibuted 
> nature of the web, yech.

It's perfectly reasonable for our Guide to give a crash-course
on each of the underlying technologies. That's what we
did in the DAML walkthru.


 Minimalist survival guide to XML
 http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-walkthru.html#xml-guide

 Minimalist survival guide to RDF
 http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-walkthru.html#rdf-guide

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 30 September 2002 23:00:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:52 GMT