Re: comments on Concepts

One more:

* References
[HTML-RDFA] needs to point to Rec version

On 04-11-13 20:06, Guus Schreiber wrote:
> As preparation for working on the Primer I read through Concepts again.
> Her are some detailed editorial suggestions (all to be handled during CR
> except maybe the first one).
>
> Guus
>
> * Almost all references to Semantics are to the 2004 document (RDF-MT
> instead of RDF11-MT).
>
> * Sec. 1.8
> Suggest to include at least one syntax that handles RDF datasets, i.e.
> TriG.
>
> * Secs. 3.3 & 5.2
> The namescace document http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns does
> not contain these two new datatypes:
>    http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#langString
>    http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#HTML
>
> * Sec. 3.6
> Should the reference to RDF Test Cases be updated?
>
> * Sec. 4.2
> We probably had this discussion before, but I suggest to change "Primary
> resources" to "Primary Web resources", for clarity.
>
> * Sec. 5
> [[
>    Language-tagged strings have the datatype IRI
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#langString. No datatype is
> formally defined for this IRI because the definition of datatypes does
> not accommodate language tags in the lexical space.
> ]]
>
> The phrasing "No datatype is formally defined" is likely to confuse
> readers, given the first sentence. Suggest to rephrase such that it
> becomes clear the datatype mapping cannot be defined. The term
> "formally" also has a specific interpretation here which might not be
> clear to everyone.
>
> * Sec. 5.1
> [[
>    The other built-in XML Schema datatypes are unsuitable for various
> reasons, and SHOULD NOT be used.
> ]]
>
> Explicate how this statement is related to the note just below it.
>
> * Sec. 6
> [[
>    Primary resources may have multiple representations that are made
> available via content negotiation [WEBARCH]. Fragments in RDF-bearing
> representations should be used in a way that is consistent with the
> semantics imposed by any non-RDF representations. For example, if the
> fragment chapter1 identifies a document section in an HTML
> representation of the primary resource, then the IRI <#chapter1> should
> be taken to denote that same section in all RDF-bearing representations
> of the same primary resource.
> ]]
>
> This paragraph has too much overlap with the previous one (subtle
> distinction, but this is likely to escape readers). Suggest to fold
> together.
>
> * Appendix A
> The introduction of RDF datasets should be mentioned
>
>
>

Received on Monday, 4 November 2013 20:11:04 UTC