- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 15:21:31 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Some comments on the 28-Aug MT draft. I think this is great, and highly edifying. My comments mostly point up areas I was struggling to understand what was being said... -- Secetion 0/general. The Qname prefixes rdf and rdfs are used extensively. For completeness, the corresponding URIs should probably be noted somewhere; e.g. in section 0: [[[ This memo uses the QName syntax to refer to certain URIs defined by RDF. The following namespace prefix and URI values are assumed throughout: Prefix: rdf, namespace URI: http://... Prefix: rdfs, namespace URI: http://... ]]] -- Section 1. Although it becomes fairly clear on careful reading, it wasn't immediately obvious to me that this section did not deal with anon nodes. Maybe a 1st sentence: [[[ This section describes the interpretation of ground RDF graphs. ]]] This section seemed to introduce symbols and notation without always clearly indicating what they were intended to denote: I vocab(I) <s p o> 5th para: I take it the discussion of time-varying referents is not intended to preclude resources with time-varying attributes? (E.g. a vehicle whose current position can be a function of time.) Introduction of E and I(E): "... RDF graph E in I ..." took several attempts to grok because I kept reading the "in" as set inclusion; maybe "according to" or "under"? Also, I found the description of E as an RDF graph to be slightly confusing, because some of the interpretations given were for things that I don't understand to be graphs: <qLiteral>, <uriref>. Denotation of I(E): missing bracket I(s) in if E is an asserted triple with the form <s p o> then I(E) = true iff <I(s),I(o)> is in IEXT(I(p))... (Isn't the 'iff' overkill here, in the presence of the otherwise clause?) -- Section 2. The meaning of B in "for some value of B defined on anon(E)" was not immediately clear to me. I think you mean something like "for some mapping B from anon(E) to the domain of I". Paragraph discussing treatment of anon nodes as existentially quantified. "... there is no need to specify the scope of the quantifier within a graph." Should that be "quantification"? (I understand "quantifier" to be a variable name used to denote quantification.) Next para: I struggled with this; "the same interpretation ... also assigns truth values to graphs with anonymous nodes", etc. I don't see how this works. The Interpretation defined for ground graphs seems to depend on having a direct model theoretic interpretation for the nodes mentioned (if E is <s p o>, I(E) = true iff <I(s),I(o)> is in IEXT(I(p))... ) -- Section 3. When you say: I(rdfs:ConstraintResource) is in IC do you mean ... is in IR? The next condition is well-mangled by my browser; is that the intersection of "ICEXT(I(rdfs:ConstraintResource)) and IP" ? -- That's all for now. #g ------------ Graham Klyne (GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2001 10:25:46 UTC