- From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:56:13 +0200
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- CC: Stella Mitchell <cleo@us.ibm.com>, RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
> All: Since not all of these comments are editorial only, how shall I
> proceed with implementing them, as the version is frozen now?
I know that certainly BLD should be refrozen (but after we conclude the
discussion in the thread [1], and of course after the okay from Michael
and Harold), and I think SWC should also be refrozen (this can be done
now, unless people have further comments).
So, I think you should just go ahead and address the comments.
Best, Jos
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jul/0098.html
>
> I suggest, I implement the editorial ones and summarize the others in a
> follow-up mail.
>
> Axel
>
> Stella Mitchell wrote:
>>
>> Hi Axel,
>>
>> I'm resending these comments (slightly updated) from a few weeks ago,
>> because I don't
>> know if you saw them. I think the items in the first section are
>> simple errors that could
>> be corrected for this WD. I didn't check the typos and wording
>> suggestions against the
>> current document.
>>
>> Stella
>>
>>
>> Comments: -----------------
>>
>> The text of the abstract is missing.
>>
>> Section 2.1.2
>> EBNF: LANGTAG is not used, rif:text types are not
>> covered?
>> Sections 4.1 and 4.2:
>> add guard and negative guard predicates for xsd:date
>>
>> Section 4.3
>> add a cast function for xsd:date
>>
>> Section 4.3.6
>> I think the motivating example in the 1st paragraph is not
>> complete:
>> this would immediately result in ...
>> -->
>> and then if a ruleset asserted
>> "http://example.org/iriA"^^rif:iri =
>> "http://example.org/iriB"^^rif:iri, this would result in
>> ...
>>
>> Section 4.4.1.4 (func:numeric-divide)
>> Mapping bullet:
>> Delete the first sentence (looks like a leftover
>> copy/paste)
>>
>> Section 4.4.2
>> add pred:numeric-not-equal
>>
>> Sections 4.6.1 & 4.6.2
>> remove the predicates and functions related to
>> xsd:duration type
>> (4.6.1.13-4.6.1.18 and 4.6.2.10)
>>
>> Document:
>> To match the list of data types in section 2.2, a number of
>> references to
>> xs:long throughout the document need to be updated to
>> xs:double
>>
>> The text in sections 2.1.1 and 2.2 says that all RIF
>> dialects must
>> include all the symbol spaces and data types. (as opposed to
>> the catalog idea, where each dialect specifies which subset
>> it requires).
>>
>> General:
>> -------------
>> How about renaming the first section to Introduction or
>> Overview, (keeping
>> the current content) and adding some introductory description
>> about how
>> this document fits with the others (as described in the
>> abstract), intended
>> audience, how it should be updated when new dialects are
>> defined, and
>> general topics such as that rule sets can use additional symbol
>> spaces
>> that are not included in this document...
>>
>>
>> Typos & wording suggestions:
>> ---------------------------------------------
>> Section 1
>> ----------------
>> 1st sentence:
>> make "RIF's presenation syntax" a link
>>
>> 2.1. Constants and Symbol Spaces
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>> 1st para, last sentence:
>> identified by IRI --> identified by <identifier>
>>
>> Definition (Symbol space):
>> FLD also has a third bullet saying that two symbol spaces
>> cannot share
>> the same identifier
>>
>> Next para:
>> However, to simplify --> <new para> For convenience,
>> ("However" doesn't seem like an appropriate link
>> between the 2 sentences)
>>
>> Next para: 2nd sentence:
>> Maybe expand on the statement about rulesets being
>> able to use
>> additional symbol spaces.
>>
>> bulleted list:
>> xsd:decimal bullet: corresponds -->
>> correspond
>>
>> 2 duration bullets:
>> 2nd bullet:
>> xsd:dayTimeDuration --> xsd:yearMonthDuration
>>
>> para before EBNF:
>> I think it reads better reworded as:
>> In order to make rules written in RIF's presentation
>> syntax more readable,
>> the syntax includes shortcut notations for constants in
>> several of the
>> symbol spaces. RIF's presentation syntax for constants
>> is defined by
>> the following EBNF.
>> UNICODESTRING:
>> escpape --> escape
>>
>> last para before section 2.2:
>> Other than the first sentence, the rest of the text seems
>> out of place here -
>> or it should have a different lead in, other than "For
>> instance"
>> 2.2. Data Types
>> -----------------------
>> 3rd para:
>> DTS always includes the data types supported by that
>> dialect -->
>> DTS always includes the data types required by that dialect
>>
>> 3.1 Syntax of Built-ins
>> -------------------------------
>> 1st para:
>> does BLD need to be called out here, (since this is
>> supposed to
>> be common to all dialects?
>>
>> 2nd para:
>> defined in in --> defined in
>>
>> For RIF's normative syntax, see XML Serialization Syntax
>> for RIF-BLD -->
>> For RIF's normative syntax, see XML Serialization Syntax
>> for RIF-FLD ?
>>
>> 3rd para:
>> both the well-formed externally defined terms and their
>> syntax -->
>> both the syntax and semantics of exernally defined terms
>>
>> schemas have especially simple form -->
>> schemas have an especially simple form
>>
>> 3.2 Semantics of Built-ins
>> -------------------------------------
>> 1st para:
>> does BLD need to be called out here, since this is supposed
>> to be common to all dialects?
>>
>> 4 List of Supported Built-in Predicates and Functions
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> How about changing the section heading to: "RIF Built-in
>> Predicates and Functions"?
>>
>> list item 5 (intended domains):
>> I think the last 2 sentences of first paragraph read better
>> reworded as:
>> This means that if one or more of the arguments is not
>> in its intended domain, the
>> value of */I/*_external (ó)(a_1 ... a_n ) can vary
>> from one semantic structure to another. Similarly, */
>> I/*_truth ï */I/*_external (ó)(a_1 ... a_n ) can be *t* in
>> some interpretations and *f* in others when an argument
>> is not in the intended domain.
>>
>> 4.1 (same comments apply to section 4.2 )
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> 1st para:
>> RIF requires guard predicates for all its supported data types -->
>> RIF requires guard predicates for all its data types
>>
>> Also, section 4.2 uses 'has' where this sentence says 'requires'
>> and at the end of section 4.2 it says that RIF does *not*
>> require guards
>> for all data types.
>>
>> 1st bullet:
>> for one of the RIF supported data types -->
>> for one of the RIF data types
>>
>> where applicable without creating ambiguities -->
>> where applicable as long as they don't create ambiguities
>>
>> 4.3 Cast Functions...
>> ------------------------------ for all its supported data
>> types -->
>> for all of the data types
>>
>> 4.3.3 rdf:XMLLiteral
>> ------------------------------
>> Mappings bullet:
>> Mappings --> Mapping
>> givne --> given
>>
>> 4.3.4 rif:text
>> ----------------
>> Mapping bullet:
>> s --> s1
>> 4.3.5 rif:iri
>> ----------------
>> "The following equalities hold in every RIF interpretation for
>> each unicode string a:"
>> --> for each string, or only for those that are in a
>> certain format?
>>
>> "a"^^xsd:iri --> "a"^^rif:iri
>>
>> there are a few <tt> tags in the last paragraph
>>
>> 4.3.6 pred:iri-to-string
>> --------------------------------
>> 1st para:
>> the link to the rif:iri cast function needs to be fixed up
>>
>> 2nd para: " (see example below)" -- can't find the
>> example below
>>
>> Schema bullet:
>> (?arg1, ?arg1) --> (?arg1, ?arg2)
>>
>> Intended domain bullet:
>> aregument --> argument
>>
>> Mapping bullet:
>> (?arg1, ?arg1) --> (?arg1, ?arg2)
>>
>> is en --> is in
>>
>> 4.4.1 Numeric Functions
>> -----------------------------------
>> which functions does the sentence between sections 4.4.1.1 and
>> 4.4.1.2 apply to?
>> should it be moved to the beginning, or qualified?
>>
>> 4.4.1.4 func:numeric-divide
>> ----------------------------------------
>> Mapping bullet:
>> I'm not sure "backs up the "div" operator" is
>> self-explanatory enough for a reader
>> of this document? (same comment for next few sections)
>>
>> 4.4.2
>> -------
>> which predicates does the sentence between sections 4.4.2.1 and
>> 4.4.2.2 apply to?
>> it should be qualified and possibily moved to the beginning?
>>
>> 4.5 Functions and Predicates on Strings
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> 2nd para:
>> we equally allow simply to write --> we allow the equivalent
>> forms
>>
>> The comment about not lifting restrictions made in BLD seems
>> like
>> it would be better placed in the BLD document, since DTB is
>> supposed
>> to be general to all dialects.
>>
>> 4.5.1.2 func:concat
>> ----------------------------
>> (?arg1; func:concat1(1)) --> (?arg1; func:concat1(?arg1))
>>
>> 4.5.1.3 func:string-join
>> --------------------------------
>> schema bullet
>> two of them are named join2
>> 4.5.2.4
>> ---------
>> pred:matchess --> pred:matches
>>
>> 6 Appendix
>> -----------------
>> RIF-BLD --> RIF-DTB
>>
>>
>
>
--
Jos de Bruijn debruijn@inf.unibz.it
+390471016224 http://www.debruijn.net/
----------------------------------------------
If knowledge can create problems, it is not
through ignorance that we can solve them.
- Isaac Asimov
Received on Friday, 11 July 2008 15:08:02 UTC