- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 19:36:26 +0200
- To: "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Hi all, I had a look at the latest version of RDF Concepts and have a couple of comments and suggestions: Linked Data is not mentioned at all in the document. Given the perma-thread we just had I think it should at least be said once that RDF can be used to create Linked Data. Maybe after this sentence: Perhaps the most important characterisitic of IRIs in web architecture is that they can be dereferenced, and hence serve as starting points for interactions with a remote server There's also a typo in that sentence s/characterisitic/characteristic/ Can we drop the "universe of discourse" or replace it with something a bit more common? The IRIs in an RDF vocabulary often share a common substring known as a namespace IRI. It would probably be better to say "often *begin* with a common substring" In section 1.4 RDF Vocabularies and Namespace IRIs, what's the point of linking to the Primer? In some contexts it is common to abbreviate IRIs that start with namespace IRIs by using the associated namespace prefix. In which contexts? It probably better to say that in some situations/contexts it is easier/beneficial/... because it makes the data more readable. Can we add JSON-LD to the list of concrete RDF syntaxes in section 1.8 RDF Documents and Syntaxes? Can we (re)move sections 1.7 Equivalence, Entailment and Inconsistency and 3.6 Graph Isomorphism, and 4.1 RDF Dataset Isomorphism (to Semantics)? Can we merge section 5.5 The Value Corresponding to a Literal into section 3.3 Literals? Cheers, Markus -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 1 July 2013 17:36:57 UTC