Re: Response to Andy Seaborne's comments on rdf:text

Andy

Thanks for the review. I will consult with other authors on the points
you have addressed. We will review the statement you suggested and
send you the feedback in the near future.

Regards

Jie

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com> wrote:
> Jie Bao wrote:
>> Dear Andy Seaborne.
>>
>> Thank you for your response. I incorporated them in the wiki-version
>> of the rdf:text document. The version is at
>> * http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=InternationalizedStringSpec&oldid=18720
>
> We have reviewed the document with respect to the changes we suggested - thank you for incorporating them.
>
> The use of "existing" in section 3 does not seem to add anything.
> Indeed, any future serialization that has built-in language tagging
> would presumable also use the usual RDF form.
>
>
> As we are agreed on the intent of the abbreviation of rdf:text, we suggest that adding an explicit statement about the intent would be helpful: suggestion:
>
> Sec 3.2:
> """
> The effect of these abbreviations is that there will be no occurrence of
> an RDF literal with datatype "rdf:text" in RDF generated by an OWL 2 or RIF
> processor. This maximises compatibility with RDF toolsets.
> """
>
> This would be especially helpful because in the RDF Syntax specification it says, referring to the rdf:namespace:
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/#section-Namespace
> 5.1 The RDF Namespace and Vocabulary
> """
> Any other names are not defined and SHOULD generate a warning when
> encountered, but should otherwise behave normally.
> """
>
>        Andy
>
> --------------------------------------------
>  Hewlett-Packard Limited
>  Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
>  Registered No: 690597 England
>



-- 
Jie Bao
http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~baojie

Received on Tuesday, 17 March 2009 02:34:07 UTC