- From: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 13:26:56 +0200
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- CC: public-rdf-comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Dear David, Thanks for your comment. We have raised an issue for tracking your comment [1]. We will get back to you on this. Best, Guus, on behalf of the RDF WG [1] https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/149 On 02-10-13 07:15, David Booth wrote: > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-mt/index.html > > Section 5.2 Intuitive summary needs to be scoped to a particular > interpretation or set of interpretations. At present the > interpretations are implicit, and this is misleading because it suggests > that the notion of a graph being true is somehow independent of an > interpretation, whereas in fact the truth of a graph critically depends > on the interpretations that are chosen. > > I suggest rewording the first sentence of this section from: "An RDF > graph is true exactly when: . . . " to: "An RDF graph is true exactly > when there exists an interpretation such > that: . . . " > > Also, the verb "interpret" is being used in this clause: "2. there is > some way to interpret all the blank nodes in the graph as referring to > things,", but that causes confusion with the notion of an interpretation > (which is a function). It would be better to use a different verb at > this point. > > Also point 4 mentions "these interpretations", but it isn't clear what > interpretations are meant. Perhaps it means the results of the verb > "interpret" in item 2? In which case, a different word should be used > here also. > > Thanks, > David > >
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 11:27:24 UTC