- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 00:14:06 +0000
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- CC: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Richard Cyganiak wrote: > On 21 Nov 2012, at 20:45, Nathan wrote: >> Would it be possible to change the word "container" to "provider", personally I feel it reads and conveys better. >> >> - "We informally use the term RDF source to refer to a persistent yet mutable source or container of RDF graphs." >> + "We informally use the term RDF source to refer to a persistent yet mutable source or provider of RDF graphs." > > I'd like to keep “container” here to leave the definition broader. > > How about replacing “source” with “provider”? They are near synonyms, and “source” is already in the defined term itself. Perhaps, I guess my main concern was the plural container of graphs, it conveyed to me that I may reasonably expect to get back multiple graphs when I poked an RDF source, since it may contain many graphs. Containing multiple graphs is quite different to containing multiple triples. Thanks for everything else that follows -> Best, nathan >> - "RDF sources may change their state over time. That is, they may contain different RDF graphs at different times." >> + "RDF sources may change their state over time. That is, they may provide different RDF graphs at different times." > > Well, works for me, so changed. > >> As a minor note, 3.1 the definition of a Triple, "An RDF triple contains three components", does this differ in any way from "An RDF triple is comprised of three components", and if not, is the latter a possible editorial change? > > I agree, “contains” implies that there might be identity that is independent from the “contents”. The proposed “is comprised of” fixes that, but sounds complicated. I changed it to "consists of", perhaps a good middle ground. > > Best, > Richard
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2012 00:15:17 UTC