Re: TriG - review comments

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Souripriya Das
<souripriya.das@oracle.com>wrote:

> All we need is to be consistent, that is, not use both "a RDF" and "an
> RDF" -- whichever is considered accurate. -- Souri.
>

If that is all we're inconsistent about I'll accept that as a win ;) Will
fix in TriG doing whatever RDF Concepts does.


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: sandro@w3.org
> To: souripriya.das@oracle.com
> Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:50:05 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada
> Eastern
> Subject: Re: TriG - review comments
>
> On 09/18/2013 10:18 AM, Souripriya Das wrote:
> > Document looks good. I have some minor editorial comments below (based
> on last night's version).
> >
> > Editorial:
> >
> > Sec 1.
> > - Please use hyphen or comma between "Trig" and "a concrete syntax ..."
> >    "This document defines TriG a concrete syntax for RDF as defined in
> the RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax ([rdf11-concepts])."
> >
>

Done.


> > Sec 2.
> > - Please replace "A IRI" with "An IRI"
> >    "A IRI or blank node label used as a graph label may also reoccur as
> part of any triple statement."
>

Done.

> >
> > Sec 2.1.
> > - Please replace "an RDF" with "a RDF"
>
> Really?   Isn't RDF pronounced "are dee eff" and therefore best preceded
> with "an" instead of "a"?
>

See above.


>
> >
> > Sec 2.2.
> > - Please replace "more then" with "more than"
> >    "In a TriG document a graph IRI or blank node may be used to label
> more then one graph."
>

Done.


> >
> > - Please consider using: "may be used as label for more than one graph
> statements"
> >    "In a TriG document a graph IRI or blank node may be used to label
> more then one graph."
>

Done.


> >
> > Sec 2.3.1
> > - As an example, we could refer to use of _:b in Example 2 and in
> Example 3 in Sec 2.2.
> >    "BlankNodes sharing the same label in differently labeled graph
> statements are considered to be the same BlankNode."
>

Will consider, editorial not holding up publication.


> >
> > General comment:
> > Could we say something like: "a graph statement has two parts: a label
> and an RDF graph. The label of a graph statement can be an IRI or a blank
> node. ..."
> > This may make refering to the label easier.
>
>
... considering editorial and not holding up publication, may try and
address. Worried about possibility of this being controversial.

+1 to the rest.
>
>         - s
>
> > I quickly browsed the grammar -- seemed fine to me.
> >
> > Thanks,
>

Thank you for your review!

Cheers,
Gavin


> > - Souri.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>