- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:49:56 -0400 (EDT)
- To: sattler@cs.man.ac.uk
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Here is a summary of the changes made. peter > > Hi, > > below is the outcome of my review of the RDF mapping. In general, this > is a well-written, clear document, and I didn't see any serious > technical problems. Thanks. :-) > In fact, most of my comments are trivial or > cosmetic. > - "datatype" is a single word in Syntax, so perhaps it should be here as > well Fixed in the one place "data type" shows up. > - Section 2.1, in the first paragraph, it says that the mapping T > produces RDF(O): this seems to be confusing. Can't we say that T > produces T(O)? Should it be mentioned explicitly that T is defined > recursively? And should there be an explanation of "Main Node of T(S)" > (where is it used/what is it good for?) -- especially since T(S) might > *not* produce any triple, but only a single node ? Augmented the discussion and changed RDF(O) to T(O). In some sense, RDF(O) is better, but T(O) is historical and shorter. There is now a short discussion of recursive invocation and the role of the main node of T. > - in Table 1, > --- there are 2 lines for translating "Ontology (..)" statements: could > we have a little comment in each line like "For ontologies with a > URI"/"For ontologies without a URI"? There are quite a few places where different constructs with the same "keyword" are translated differently, including Declaration and cardinality restrictions. I don't see this as any different. > - in Section 2.2, can we rephrase "let ax' be the axiom that is > equivalent to ax but that contains no annotations" with "let ax' be the > axiom that is obtained from ax by removing all annotations' (or be more > precise re. 'equivalent')? Done. > - in Section 3, > > --- could we make it more clear when "any matched triple is removed"? > E.g., can have a special indicator in the tables to show which are > "destructive"? Or at least indicate it always in the title or before a > the table? Each removal is now before the table(s), in a separate paragraph (almost always), and using similar wording. I also regularized other wordings related to removal and correctness. > --- I found "The rules from the following sections are not allowed to > redefine the value of any of these functions for some x." for 2 reasons: > (1) they *are* redefined because they change these functions from "= > epsilon" to something else, and (2) shouldn't it be "for any x." at the > end? Changed to: * The rules from the following sections are not allowed to *redefine* (i.e., change after the initial definition) the value of any of these functions for any ''x''. > --- can we add "{...}" after "Possible conditions on the pattern are > enclosed in curly braces" (it would help to find this sentence!) and > replace "Possible" with "Additional"? And the same for square brackets > and [...] Done. > --- Table 2 is repeated from Table 1 -- can this be made clear so that > the reader doesn't have to check how they differ? The intent of the two tables is different, as they go in different directions. > - the beginning of Section 3.1 seems contradictory: if G contains no > "whose predicate is rdf:type and object is owl:Ontology, then the > ontology header is Ontology( ... )." seems to indicate that the absence > of such a triple is fine, whereas "if no such pattern can be matched in > G, or ..., the graph G is rejected as invalid." indicates that this > absence leads to rejection?! Note the "otherwise" in the paragraph! > - "tiple" in Table 3 Changed to "grog". :-) > - in Table 5, doesn't the second case need a condition {and *:x rdf:type > owl:ObjectProperty is not in G}? And similar for the others? Added a comment before the table to indicate that this particular matching process stops when no changes are made to G. > - can the columns of Table 8 be swapped to fit in with the other tables? Done. [...] > - Section 3.5 > --- contains a "patters" What, you don't like Gilbert and Sullivan. :-) peter
Received on Tuesday, 9 September 2008 12:51:15 UTC