W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > December 2001

Re: RDF/XML Syntax Revised WD for review

From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:16:32 +0100
To: dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <OF4AD323F7.E7F1EEED-ON41256B21.007487D8@bayer-ag.com>
Hi Dave,

> I attach a copy of the syntax document for your consideration
> for publication as a working draft.  I think the following people
> were actioned to review it (no minutes as of this date recording it)
>   Jeremy Carroll
>   Jos De Roo
>   Patrick Stickler
> but others, feel free :)
> The attached files corresponds to CVS version 1.333 of
>   http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/07/rdf-syntax-grammar/
> (CVS http://cvs.ilrt.org/cvsweb/redland/rdfcore/syntax/index.html )
> plus the attached relaxng which are for information, not part of
> the document, but are intended to be published with the working draft.
> I think I need to carry on trying to improve the very new section 2
> but it could be published as is.

in "3 Data Model" last line
... part of the node ro computed from the string-value of contained nodes.

in "3.6 Identifier Node" 2nd sentence
... These nodes are created by giving two values for the for the ...

in "5.9 Production resourcePropertyElt" the N-Triples statement
... e.parent.subject.string-value <e.URI> n.subject.string-value; .

I would propose to drop reification!
so proposal to drop its sentences in 5.5, 5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 5.12 and 5.14
as well as "5.26 Reification Rules"

Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

PS my review is in no sense complete (I lost half of this day
   with a serious panic situation in my family today, but it
   was a false alarm, and everything is alright now, luckily)
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2001 18:16:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:07 UTC