- From: Thomas Baker <thomas.baker@bi.fhg.de>
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 15:59:57 +0200
- To: "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>
- Cc: Alistair Miles <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>, public-esw-thes@w3.org, public-swbp-wg@w3.org, danbri@w3.org
Alistair, Ralph, Some comments on http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/spec/2005-05-03. I see "semantic web" is written in lower case; is that the SWBPD WG house style? The focus of this review is, again, the policy-related sections -- Status of this Document, Introduction, and Policy Statements (especially Change). Basically, it looks fine except for a few points: -- The statuses of Public Working Draft (and Editor's Working Draft) are mentioned not linked to a W3C document describing what these various types of specification are. This is particularly confusing in light of the statement that the SWBPD WG "intends the SKOS Core Vocabulary Specification to become a W3C Working Group Note" (e.g., one wonders how a Working Group Note relates to a Public Working Draft). -- Another subtle but confusing point is that this document is called Editor's Draft, and one could wonder if that is the same as an Editor's Working Draft... -- The Introduction mentions "a formal representation of the SKOS Core Vocabulary... in RDF/OWL". However, the relationship of this formal representation to the other W3C specification forms (Editor's Working Draft and Public Working Draft) is not specified. My assumption (based in part on conversations with Alistair) is that the formal representation would be maintained in sync with the latest Public Working Draft. But if this is the case, I do not see this point stated anywhere; in fact, this one mention would seem to be the only reference to the formal schema in the whole specification. I think this could be fixed by adding a sentence or two here or there -- e.g., by adding a Point 9 under Changes, to the effect that "All approved changes will be implemented at the same time in the formal representation of the SKOS Core Vocabulary in RDF/OWL". -- The statement "New classes or properties may be added to the SKOS Core Vocabulary at any time" seems wrong. Rather, "new classes and properties may be added in accordance with the process outlined above" -- or words to that effect...? Tom -- Dr. Thomas Baker Thomas.Baker@izb.fraunhofer.de Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven mobile +49-160-9664-2129 Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft work +49-30-8109-9027 53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-144-2352 Personal email: thbaker79@alumni.amherst.edu
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2005 13:58:03 UTC