W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: Review of Service Description document

From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:38:15 -0800
Cc: W3C SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E807580B-99B3-4C72-80CD-BE21E671701F@evilfunhouse.com>
To: Alexandre Passant <Alexandre.Passant@deri.org>
On Dec 27, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Alexandre Passant wrote:

>>> * Section 3.3:
>>> Some instances names start with a lowercase, should be better to use uppercase here (as done in the entailment URIs)
>> Is this common for instances? I'm familiar with common practice regarding classes and properties, but not with similar practices for instances. I actually prefer the lowercase, but will change it if there's agreement on this point.
> I don't think there are some given rules, but I saw that used in various places, as well as in the entailment URIs.
> Ivan or Eric, is there any W3C guidelines regarding this ?

Aside from simple entailment, I'd expect all the entailment URIs to be capitalized simply because they are acronyms.

>>> * Section 3.3.3:
>>> "sd:dereferenceURLs" shouldn't it be "sd:dereferenceURIs" (URL / URI) ?
>> Won't they necessarily be URLs if they can be dereferenced?
> According to AWWW vol.1 [1] you dereference URIs, so that would make more sense to me.

OK. I'm updating this along with the capitalization issue. Does anyone have a preference on the tense of feature URIs ("dereference" versus "dereferences")?

I'll consider these for the new IRIs:


>>> * Section 3.4:
>>> For consistency, as for each class (in 3.3), you mention they are instances of rdfs:Class, property descriptions should mention that they are instances of DatatypeProperty / ObjectProperty.
>> I'm hesitant to add lots of OWL terms, but could probably be convinced. I notice that there's already one OWL statement in declaring sd:url an IFP.
> Right, as you already use IFP, I was thinking it could be useful to also use OWL to distinguish DP / OP

OK. I'll put that on my todo list, but may not get it in for this draft.

Also, I wanted to mention that I'm going to try to flesh out the modeling of the sd:availableGraphDescriptions property as it's currently rather under-specified.

Received on Monday, 28 December 2009 08:38:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:58 UTC