- From: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 09:01:00 -0400
- To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 05:00:12PM +0100, Dave Beckett wrote: > > http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/07/rdf-syntax-grammar/ Very nice Dave! I just have a few comments from version 1.69. > These are strawman answers, where there are any, and my intention is > that if you have better / other words, put them in your email reply. WRT the issues in Appendix A, some issues that have not had a WG decision have an Action that implies (to me) a WG decision has been made (e.g. rdfms-replace-value). I realize you consider this your "strawman" but all WG memebers should realize that the doc implies more decisions have been made than really have. Instead of Action, perhaps it would be useful to use Status and then to assign a status value such as: Decided - Change, Decided - No Change, Undecided (instead of '?'). In the case where a decision was made, supporting text would be added. > I have also added the RelaxNG schema into an appendix and I want to > also add Jeremy's XSLT mapping to the document. As I've stated before I like the apparent simplicity and clarity of the RelaxNG non-XML schema. I do wonder, however, how we verify this schema or any other schemas that may be added to Appendix D (the document says XML Schema and Schematron are TODOs). It seems like the schemas in Appendix D should explicitly state whether or not they are normative. Also, do we really need to provide more than one schema; what about just pointing to the work of James and Rick instead of including their work in the document? > Please comment on > structure too; should the section 3 issues move to an appendix also, > or a later section? Should appendix A, B go entirely? > > Next, I am going to work on section 4, try to write down the mappings > to N-Triples, Since a lot of the text in section 6 of the M&S specifies triple creations, it seems like extreme care will be needed to assure all of the relevant text in that section is transfered to the new doc. Also, what do you expect to document wrt triple generation versus what do you expect to get from the Snail work?
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2001 09:01:07 UTC