- From: RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 10:41:07 +0000
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
RDF-ISSUE-147: Definition of "Generalized RDF" [RDF Concepts] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/147 Raised by: Guus Schreiber On product: RDF Concepts Comment by David Booth: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Oct/0006.html Regarding section 7 http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-concepts-20130723/#section-generalized-rdf It does not look like my comments about Generalized RDF were addressed: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Aug/0008.html [[ I think the most appropriate place for the definition of "generalized RDF" would be in the RDF Semantics document, for two reasons: (a) that's where the notion is actually used (to simplify entailment rules); and (b) that would give it less prominence and hence reduce the likelihood that someone would think it is a form of standard RDF. ]] Also, I still think it needs a stronger warning that generalized RDF is non-standard. Also, in Section 7 "A generalized RDF graph is an RDF graph" should be "A generalized RDF graph is a graph", because the whole point is that a *generalized* RDF graph is *not* necessarily a conforming RDF graph. David
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 10:41:12 UTC