Re: Editorial comments :: 2005Jul/{0028,0029,0041}

Yes, I agree these are responsive to the comments
and that they're editorial (i.e. consistent with WG
proceedings to date and not observable from tests).

Please make the changes and ask the commentor if
he's satisfied. I'll do it for the XML 1.1 EBNF
comment to set an example.


On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 14:57 +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> I consider the following editorial:
> 
> ==== SPARQL: use of "my", etc in examples
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Jul/0028
> 
> 
> (All uses of "my" actually in examples which shoud not be translated anyway)
> 
> Proposals:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#syntaxMisc
> 2.8: replace with ":myClass" with ":appClass"
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#rdfliterals
> 3: "abc"^^myNS:myDataType => "abc"^^appNS:myDataType
> 
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#construct
> 10.3
> http://example.org/myGraph => http://example.org/aGraph
> app:myDate => app:customDate
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#describe
> 10.4
> myOrg.example => org.example.com
> myOrg: => exOrg:
> 
> 11.2.4 Extensible Value Testing
> my: => func:
> http://my.example => http://example.org/
> myGeo: => aGeo:
> 
> 
> ==== SPARQL: XML 1.1 EBNF normative
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/0029
> 
> add link at EBNF to XML 1.1 (which is already in normative section because Dan 
> has already done it) in grammar section
> 
> 
> ==== SPARQL: incorrect/confusing example in 9.3
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Jul/0041
> 
> Proposal:
> Fix example to use mailto:aloce@work.example.org>
> 
> 
> 	Andy
> 
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Monday, 25 July 2005 14:22:47 UTC