- From: Adrian Paschke <adrian.paschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 17:59:42 +0200
- To: "'RIF'" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Hi Christian, Here first part of my review of XML Data in RIF. The document is clearly in the state of a first working draft and has many editors’ notes left. Several sections and details are missing, like e.g. the conformance definition. I would propose to make this explicit in “Status of this Document” section in the beginning, as readers might wonder why the RIF working group is finished while this document is still very much a working draft. C=Comments, Q=Questions Section 2 Definition (RIF+XML data combination) …E is a, possibly empty, set of [data model nodes]XP that contains the information that is represented in the XML data Q: Does it make sense to have just an XML schema attached with a RIF document without having any concrete XML data, i.e. an empty XML data set? C: The constraints on the combination are missing. Section 2.1 Syntax C: Since the complete working draft has been written for using Strings to represent XPath expressions, I propose to remove the editors notes about rif:IRI as alternative. Example 2.1. “Another rule example, below, shows how another kind of XPath expression, used as an xs:string constant: "@xml:lang"</nowiki>>” C: </nowiki>> should be removed A consequence is that such values have to be cast into the required types when used as arguments to RIF buit-in functions and predicates. C: RIF built-in functions to add a frame formula to the condition, to check that the variable ?x is bound to an element that is, itself, named ex:Customer": ?x["ex:Name" -> ?y] ?x["self::ex:Customer"->?x] C: This imposes an ordering of the conditions, since ?x first needs to be bound. So you cannot write: ?x["self::ex:Customer"->?x] ?x["ex:Name" -> ?y] 2.2.2. Combined interpretation of RIF BLD non-document formulas and XML data C: [component-kind()]CD; [component-name()]CD etc. has not be defined before Definition (RIF BLD+XML data combined interpretation) Itruth(Iframe(IDM(e))(IC("expr"^^xs:string), RIFValue(e, expr))) = t (true) Q: Is it actually an interpretation of a frame as defined in the semantics of BLD or something which syntactically looks like a frame but semantically it is different (e.g. order dependent, based on an external schema, at least for the XPath functions etc.)? (T1, T2) ∈ Classes(S)2 Q: Why Classes(S)2? -Adrian
Received on Thursday, 7 October 2010 16:07:49 UTC