Comments on Model WD of 2015-10-15: Editorial comments

Rob, Paolo, Benjamin,

this is the first of a series of mails with my comments reading through the new draft. Before getting into the comments themselves (I do not think any of those are substantial) I have to say that the document is, overall, really readable and good. Thanks…

I separate my comments into different mails because that may make it easier to be handled rather than a giant mail with many sub-items. (I was wondering whether I should use github issues or mail, but the text refers to the mailing list only.)

As I put into the subject, here are just a few, purely editorial comments.

• All the references are marked as informative references. I do not think this is correct; some of those (reference to JSON-LD, Turtle, various RFC-s, etc) are clearly normative and should be marked as such. On the other hand, we will have to be careful not to use as normative reference a document that is still in flux (e.g., Jeni's document on fragment ID usage)

• We have to separate the normative and informative sections in the document. Section 1, Appendix C, E, F are probably informative, the rest are normative. There may be subsections that are also informative, I did not check.

• Isn't it correct that, in English, it is considered better to use 'zero' instead of '0', 'one' instead of '1', etc, for small numbers? This pattern is used quite a number of times in the text.

• 3.2.1. is, sort of, the definition of what an external resource is, but the text itself is not really defining it. Even after reading it is unclear whether there is a difference between a Web Resource and and External resource… Actually, is there?

• In section 3.2.1.1. there seems to be a mixup in the example. The Turtle example seems to be different from the JSON-LD one…

Ivan

----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704