- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:46:30 -0600
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 16:37 -0500, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> > Subject: Re: comment on wording at beginning of SPARQL Query Language for RDF > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:04:29 -0600 > > > On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 15:32 -0500, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > > I just started reading > > > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20060220/ > > > > > > and was brought up short by the poor wording at its very beginning: > > > > > > An RDF graph is a set of triples; each triple consists of a subject, a > > > predicate and an object. This is defined in RDF Concepts and Abstract > > > Syntax [CONCEPTS]. These triples can come from a variety of sources. > > > > > > Perhaps I have just read it too many times, but I can't see anything > > wrong with that wording. > > The referent of the "This" could be one of any number of things. It could the > "RDF graph", "triple", "set of triples", "subject", "predicate', or "object". > There are even other possibilities for the referent of "This". I see now. Thanks. > > > Surely better wording can be generated, particularly at this important part of > > > the document. > > > > Do you have any improvements to suggest? > > Yes, certainly. However, the improvement depends on the meaning of the excerpt, > which I cannot discern. OK. Please stay tuned for a substantive reply. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2006 21:46:43 UTC