W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > December 2013

Re: Concepts (almost) ready

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:35:46 -0800
Cc: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
Message-Id: <65C311D5-319E-4CE1-804C-5DB815859FF5@ihmc.us>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>

On Dec 17, 2013, at 1:39 AM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:
...
> 
>> 4.  "Blank nodes MAY be shared between graphs in an RDF dataset."  Um, I now see that this can be understood in different ways. What I think (hope) is intended here is, that if the same bnodeID is used in two graph documents in the same dataset, then that means that those two graphs do share a bnode. But what it could be read as saying is that whether or not they share the bnode is optional: they might or they might not. Which would be a very unfortunate reading. 
> 
> You are right.
> 
> How about simply lowercasing the MAY? It's not meant as something that's optional for conformance, but simply to indicate a possibility. So, MAY in the RFC2119 sense is inappropriate.

agreed.

> Alternatively, “can be shared”.

All improvements, but they still don't rule out the unfortunate reading. I think extra words are needed to do that, unfortunately.

Pat


------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 home
40 South Alcaniz St.            (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile (preferred)
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Tuesday, 17 December 2013 18:36:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:37 UTC