- 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