- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
- Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 11:29:32 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- CC: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Pat, Peter, Before sending the details of my review, these are necessary changes that must be done before publication as FPWD: 1. remove all the statements about scope in section "Notation and terminology" and 2. revert to the semantics of blank node from RDF Semantics 2004, that is, """ If E is an RDF graph then I(E) = true if [I+A](E) = true for some mapping A from the set of blank nodes in E to IR, otherwise I(E)= false. """ or possibly: """ If E is an RDF graph then I(E) = true if [I+A](E) = true for some mapping A from the set of blank nodes to IR, otherwise I(E)= false. """ If these changes are not made, I will object to the publication of RDF 1.1 Semantics as a FPWD. This is not negotiable. Of course, this does not mean that I will block any further changes to these sections, nor that there cannot be eventually a discussion on scope in Semantics. I will provide a detailed review with rationale for this, but for the moment, it suffices to say that RDF 1.1 Semantics does not provide a semantics for what's defined in Concepts. Rather, it specifies a semantics for its own conception of what RDF should be. -- Antoine Zimmermann ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne 158 cours Fauriel 42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2 France Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03 Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66 http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2013 10:30:14 UTC