Re: SKOS Primer editorial problems

Hello Daniel,

Thanks for your last input. I consider this now closes the formal issue we raised, related to your comment [1]!

Best,

Antoine

[1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/226

> Antoine Isaac wrote:
> ...
>  > Thanks very much for the very detailed comments!
> 
> You're welcome.  It's nice to know that my tendency toward details
> was helpful.
> 
> 
> 
>  >> * Section 4.7 says:
>  >>
>  >>      Applications that require finer granularity will greatly benefit
>  >>      from SKOS being a Semantic Web vocabulary.
>  >>
>  >>    That really should be:
>  >>
>  >>      Applications that require finer granularity will greatly benefit
>  >>      from SKOS's being a Semantic Web vocabulary.
>  >>
>  >>    (The gerund ("being") should have a possessive noun (SKOS's)
>  >>    before it, not a plain noun.)
>  >
>  >
>  > Done. We are however wondering, whether it should be "SKOS's", as you
>  > suggest, or "SKOS'"...
> 
> Yeah, I'm not fully sure about that one.
> 
> The rule I was taught was this:
> 
> If the word already has two "s" sounds as the end (separated by
> some vowel, of course), you don't add another one for the
> possessive form (based on the difficulty of saying three "s"
> syllables in a row).  The typical example words were "Jesus" and
> "Genesis" (e.g., "Jesus' mother" or "Genesis' beginning").
> 
> Otherwise, even if the word ends with an "s" sound (only a single
> one), you add one for the possessive form (e.g., the possessive
> form of "boss" would be "boss's").
> 
> Admittedly, I don't now whether grammar authorities still go by
> that rule or now go by a modified version.
> 
> 
>  > We kept as such the sentences when there was no ambiguity, e.g.:
>  > - A more appropriate KOS
>  > - its more specific species
> 
> Yes, that sounds correct.
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel
> 
> --
> (Plain text sometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft 
> Exchange.) [F]
> 
>

Received on Monday, 17 August 2009 09:17:57 UTC