- From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 20:36:59 -0500
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Cc: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
Thanks for the careful reading; I've made most of these fixes (not yet checked in). Number 1: I couldn't figure out how to say this in a way that didn't mislead the reader into thinking we were only talking about RDF or only talking about HTTP. Number 2: I just flushed IetfResource; while the difference between 3986 and RDF is annoying, I think it can be shoved under the rug. On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:57 PM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > Other suggestions on the draft at > http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/http-semantics-report.html > > > 1. I suggest adding the following at the beginning of the abstract: > [[ > Suppose the HTTP protocol were modeled as an exchange of RDF assertions > between client and server. What assertions might they be? When an HTTP > server gives a client a 200 or other response to a request, what are the > semantics of that response? > ]] > > 2. s/ht:IetfResource/ht:Resource/g just to make it easier to read. It's > already namespace-qualified, so the "Ietf" prefix doesn't add much. > > 3. s/or that they if they aren't/or if they aren't/ > > 4. s/The client finds or chooses a name/The client finds a name/ > > 5. s/continuous internal/continuous interval/ > > 6. s/ceasing to "correspond to" it/potentially ceasing to "correspond > to" it/ > > 7. s/a single content entities/a single content entity/ > > 8. In the "Correspondences" section, at the end of the ht:correspondsTo > paragraph, add "Range: ht:Resource". Ditto for the ht:toResource > paragraph. > > 9. I suggest moving this part: > [[ > ht:correspondsTo - property > > Whether a content entity corresponds to a resource is not precisely > defined; see discussion above. This is a time-sensitive relation. > Domain: ht:ContentEntity. > ]] > to the end of the Correspondences section, and preface it like this: > [[ > If one only cares about the present time, and has no need to distinguish > between correspondences that held or will hold at different times, then > a simple ht:correspondsTo property can be used: > > ht:correspondsTo - property > > > Whether a content entity corresponds to a resource is not precisely > defined; see discussion above. This is a time-sensitive relation. > Domain: ht:ContentEntity. > ]] > > 10. At the end of the introductory paragraph to the Correspondences > section, I suggest adding a paragraph: > [[ > One may think of correspondence as a four-way relation between an > ht:Resource, an ht:ContentEntity and a starting and ending time. Since > RDF doesn't directly represent four-way relations, they can be > represented using an ht:Correspondence class. However, in some ways it > is more useful to think of ht:Correspondences as existing in their own > right anyway, as this allows other information to be attached to them, > beyond just the ht:ContentEntity, ht:Resource and start and end times. > ]] > > Thanks! > David > > > >> > -- > David Booth, Ph.D. > Cleveland Clinic (contractor) > > Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily > reflect those of Cleveland Clinic. > >
Received on Saturday, 5 December 2009 01:37:34 UTC