- From: Stella Mitchell <cleo@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:19:41 -0400
- To: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OFB356032B.83D9C490-ON85257488.000484F9-85257488.005432D3@us.ibm.com>
Hi Jos, A few comments on SWC, Stella Comments & questions: ----------------------------------- Section 3: blank node example at the end of the section in the first derived triple, is it supposed to be _:x instead of _:y ? should <http://a>[<http://p> -> "john"] be mentioned? Section 3.1.3 para before the last definition: that this not included --> that are not included Section 3.2.1.1 last bulleted list: BLD makes it a point to say all the mappings are total. I don't know if it's important to include that here. 4th bullet function symbols in Const to D --> function symbols in Const to Dfunc doesn't Ic map predicate symbols also? Section 3.2.1.2 2nd & 4th conditions The frame mapping as defined in BLD takes the 'object' part as an argument and the frame mapping here takes the 'property' part as an argument? This same comment applies to the 3rd & 4th items in the 1st definition in section 4.2.2.2 and item 6 in 4.2.2.3 2nd para after conditions: RIF Document --> RIF document Similar --> Similarly Section 4 6th para: suggesting that correspondence --> suggesting that a correspondence 8th para (beginning "To ensure that"): ...syntactical restrictions are imposed on the use of variables, function terms and frame formulas --> ...syntactical restrictions are imposed on the use of variables and function terms in frame formulas ? Section 4.2.2.1 1st definition holds that if --> it holds that if 3rd para after definition: Iframe --> Iframe' Section 4.2.2.3 should the item be numbered 7? Section 5 1st para: and specify the --> and specifying the 4th para: rdfs-entailment should be used --> rdfs-entailment must be used --> 5th para: specify different profile --> specify different profiles Section 5.2 last para: u1,...,un and C may --> u1,...,un, must ? Wording suggestions: ---------------------------- Section 3.1 1st para, last sentence: --> Finally, we review definitions related to datatypes and typed literals. Section 3.1.1 para after 1st bulleted list: --> In addition, there is an infinite set of blank nodes that is disjoint from the sets of names. See RDF....for a precise definition of these concepts. Section 3.1.3 4th para: is the smallest set of datatypes that includes... --> is the union of... ? following definition: 1st bullet: The IRIs identifying all datatypes in T are in the domain of D --> Every IRI identifying a datatype in T is in the domain of D Section 4 1st para: Therefore, RIF-OWL-combinations are combinations of RIF documents and sets of RDF graphs, analogous to RIF-RDF combinations. --> Therefore, a RIF-OWL-combination consists of a RIF document and a set of RDF graphs, analogous to a RIF-RDF combination. 5th para: In the DL species, classes and properties are directly interpreted as subsets of, respectively binary relations over the domain --> In the DL species, classes and properties are directly interpreted as subsets of and binary relations over the domain (it's pretty clear, and it's also spelled out more explicitly in the next paragraph) last para: what about making an end note on OWL 2 and moving the text there? Section 4.1.1 2nd para: where P or A, respectively, occurs --> where P or A occurs Section 4.2.2.2 para starting with "Recall that" for interpreting, respectively literals (data values), --> for interpreting, respectively, literals and data values, Section 4.2.2.3 1st para: the below definition may not be extensible towards OWL 2 --> the definition below may not extend to cover OWL 2 Section 5 1st para: as pairs of documents and sets of RDF graphs/OWL ontologies --> as pairs consisting of a RIF document and a set of RDF graphs/OWL ontologies 5th para: Profiles are assumed to be ordered --> Profiles are ordered or Profiles have an order as defined later in this section. In case several graphs are imported in a document--> If several graphs are imported into a document Section 5.1 1st para If you think of the receiver and interpreter as a computer program, you could say "its" instead of "his or her"
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2008 15:20:41 UTC