- From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de>
- Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 20:47:39 +0100
- To: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi all, hi Chime, I decided to review, interpreting Chime's email as completion of ACTION 582. In general, the document reads well and I could pretty much follow despite my limited background in this area. I include my comments below. Birte Change summary: Does this really just describe the changes since last pub? I had the impression that the title of the document changed quite some time ago, but I didn't check this. Sec.1: I didn't get the second sentence and how the enumeration items are constraints. Sec. 3: There is an extra space before the full stop of the second sentence. Fig. 1&2: The figures are hard to read on a b/w printout since only the yellow/orange colour is really different from the others. Although most people will read on the screen, it might be helpful to use dashed/dotted lines or more distinct colours even when printed b/w. Fig.1 has a legend, but Fig. 2 does not. In general, I do not really understand how to read the diagrams. It is difficult to see where to start reading. I somehow expected something that illustrates the flow of sending a GET request and how this leads to the identification of a relevant set of triples/a graph, but somehow I can't see that in the Figures. In several places sentences start with "So, ...", which is not good style (at least I learned that). For example, in the two paragraphs following Fig. 2. Paragraph before 5.1: to the manipulation af RDF graph content: s/af/of/ Sec. 5.1: involving a*n* RDF payload Sec. 5.2.1: returned from dereferencing a*n* IRI (I think so) Why does the paragraph end in a semicolon? Sec. 5.3: "and using the with an IRI" does not make sense Paragraph before 5.5: The response codes were usually set in typewriter, but 202 (accepted) is not Sec. 5.5: contains "Networked-manipulable Graph Store" although the change summary said that this term is replaced with just "Graph Store" On 6 February 2012 18:58, Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de> wrote: > Hi Chime, > > I assume I can review the doc now, right? > > Birte > > On 3 February 2012 03:53, Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com> wrote: >> Updates to GSP to address WG consensus regarding: >> - RFC 2119 language in informative sections >> - Removed Protocol service discovery section 5.8 (addressing issue of >> confusion regarding SPARQL protocol URL and that of a GSP >> implementation) >> - Changed URL used to for indirect identification to reflect that it >> identifies a graph store (removed all references to 'service') >> >> -- Chime >> > > > > -- > Jun. Prof. Dr. Birte Glimm Tel.: +49 731 50 24125 > Inst. of Artificial Intelligence Secr: +49 731 50 24258 > University of Ulm Fax: +49 731 50 24188 > D-89069 Ulm birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de > Germany -- Jun. Prof. Dr. Birte Glimm Tel.: +49 731 50 24125 Inst. of Artificial Intelligence Secr: +49 731 50 24258 University of Ulm Fax: +49 731 50 24188 D-89069 Ulm birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de Germany
Received on Monday, 6 February 2012 19:51:19 UTC