Re: review of current status of the "What's New" document (ACTION-330)

So Skolemization is the Hula Hoop of 2014?

peter

On 11/27/2013 10:18 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> On 11/27/2013 01:03 PM, David Wood wrote:
>> Thanks, Peter.
>>
>> I generally agree, but am curious why you think this Note shouldn't mention 
>> Skolemization.
>>
>
> Me too.    It's often the top of my list when I'm talking to people about 
> RDF 1.1, and people seem to react as if it ought to be.
>
> I do find myself hand waving, though, since it's still unclear what exactly 
> Skolemization is good for.  It's a bit like handing someone a power tool, 
> without showing them how to use it.    (Or the beginning of The Hudsucker 
> Proxy, where the protagonist is showing people a drawing of a circle, and 
> says knowingly, "You know...  for kids!").
>
>     -- Sandro
>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> --
>> http://about.me/david_wood
>>
>>
>> On Nov 27, 2013, at 12:32, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" 
>> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> The document isn't nearly finished, so this cannot be a complete review.
>>>
>>>
>>> Suggestion for important changes list:
>>> - named graphs
>>> - plain literals
>>> - datatypes
>>> - new syntaxes
>>> That's all!  Note, nothing from semantics.
>>>
>>>
>>> There are several places where the document has too much, or misleading, 
>>> information.
>>>
>>> - The paragraph saying the section is about Concepts is misleading and 
>>> should be removed.
>>>
>>> - The paragraph saying that Concepts is definitional only.  This is not a 
>>> change, and even if it was, there is no need to talk about that here.  The 
>>> paragraph should be removed
>>>
>>> - Rewrite the new syntax paragraph to something like:
>>>  RDF 1.1. introduces a number of new serialization formats. RDF/XML is no 
>>> longer the only recommended serialization format and should be allowed to 
>>> die a deserved death.   The import of an RDF document is carried by the 
>>> RDF graph (or RDF dataset) that results from the document.
>>>
>>> - The paragraph on DOM madness should read something like:
>>>   Planned updates ... rdf:HTML.  DOM version 4 is needed to clarify 
>>> functionality ... formats. The unfinished status of ....
>>>
>>> - Generalized RDF should not be mentioned here.
>>>
>>> - Skolemization should not be mentioned here.
>>>
>>> The paragraph on datatypes should say that rdf:XMLLiteral support is optional.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The Semantics section is copied from my message to implementers.  It 
>>> carries too much information and duplicates some of the stuff from before.
>>>
>>> The paragraphs starting "Literals", "There is", and "The rdf:XMLLiteral" 
>>> can all be removed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> More when the rest of the document shows up.
>>>
>>>
>>> peter
>>>
>>>
>

Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2013 18:55:52 UTC