RE: review of RIF-FLD, April 10

Thanks Igor!

About an XSD schema for FLD: it's too late for FLD WD1,
but we'll definitely have one in WD2 a few weeks later.  

-- Harold


-----Original Message-----
From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Igor Mozetic
Sent: April 14, 2008 12:08 PM
To: RIF WG
Subject: review of RIF-FLD, April 10


I have mostly typographical corrections and suggestions,
except for Section 3.6.
I would also add the XSD schema in the appendix.
Even if it is not perfect (or what is the reason for not 
including it?) we might get some useful feedback.

Regards,
Igor


2.2 Alphabet
Definition (Alpabet), last item:
I would add "[", "]" as auxiliary symbols.

4th par:
The symbol Group is used to organize _RIF-BLD rules_
-> RIF-FLD formulas


2.3 Symbol spaces
I would itemize list of prefixes to improve readability.

Period is missing at the end of the second paragraph.

...

RIF supports the following symbol spaces...
(I already mentioned this in my first review):

    * xsd:string (http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string) 

  and all the symbol spaces that correspond to the subtypes 
  of xsd:string as specified in [XML-SCHEMA2].

    * xsd:decimal (http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal) 

  and all the symbol spaces that corresponds to the subtypes 
  of xsd:decimal as specified in [XML-SCHEMA2]. 

Do you mean that support for all the subtypes of xsd: string and
xsd:decimal has to be provided by RIF compliant systems?
Shouldn't we make them explicit, then?


2.6 Signatures

  An arrow expression is defined as follows:

    * If \u03ba, \u03ba1, ..., \u03ban \u2208 SigNames, n\u22650, 
  are signature names then (\u03ba1 ... \u03ban) \u21d2 \u03ba 
  is a positional arrow expression.
      For instance, () \u21d2 term and (term) \u21d2 term are 
->  _positional_ arrow expressions, if term is a signature name.


  A set S of signatures is coherent iff

The symbol S is already used for the set of semantic structures I
in introduction, might be confusing.


3.6 Intended Semantic Structures

The first sentences of the first and second paragraph read:

  The semantics of a set of formulas is the set of its 
  intended semantic structures. 
  For the classical first-order logic, every semantic structure is
intended.

Don't you mean:
For the classical first-order logic, every _model_ is inteded sem.str.?

Received on Monday, 14 April 2008 17:34:01 UTC