W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > November 2002

Re: response to Brian's rdfs review

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 15:19:54 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

At 09:40 09/11/2002 -0500, Dan Brickley wrote:

>Going thru the critical comments
>(1) yes, I believe Guha agreed to have his name on this (am seeking
>explicit confirmation)


>(2) After the table in the 'RDF Schema Overview' section, you ask:
>rdf:List? I'm not quites ure what you are doing here. Picking out the
>vocabulary from the older specs beforing adding in the new? Is that
>...I should have been clearer in my message on friday. That table is
>machine-generated from the RDFS namespace document. I asked for WG help in
>getting the text for the RDF/XML version correct first; I'll then rebuild
>the table.

Ok.  Fair enough - the other stuff is below.  I think I've been too hasty 
with the thumbs down.  Whew :)  A brief note here to say its not yet 
complete, maybe

>Regarding ordering, yes I just added in rdfs:Datatype in the prose after
>Property, and the new List stuff after the existing (and Recommended)
>container machinery. Unless someone is going to write a
>compare-and-contrast as to which is best used when, I'm happy with this.
>Are we depracating the old containers? I didn't think so.
>(3) 'rdf:_1, etc rdf:first, rdf:next, rdf:nil'
>see previous; when the definitions are done i'll rebuild the table.
>rdf:_1 ... is an interesting case. These are _not_ mentioned in the
>rdf/xml schema but I guess should be mentioned here. Also 'nil' is neither
>a class nor property, so doesn't fit in either table. I suggest adding a
>separate paragraph for the latter, and adding rdf:_1 by hand.

I think it could go with the table not being updated.

>(4) [[
>They are not self denoting. The class rdfs:Literal respresents the class
>of literal values such as strings and integers.
>You are correct. I caught this on paper but missed the edit. Will change.
>(5)  "s/predicate/object/"  Good catch. Will fix.
>Your other purple and green comments share a lot with my paper-based
>editorial notes which I didn't get to this week. I think the critical
>comments are fixable by monday;


>can't commit to getting to the other

Not needed for Monday.

>You've mostly flagged up broken things rather than missing stuff as
>'critical', yet below you talk about missing things. Is it mostly the
>(script-generated) summary table?

Yes.  I hadn't twigged that the other bits were below.  My apologies.

This is in better shape than I thought.  I'm back online for a few 
hours.  How can I help.

I had trouble with CVS this morning, but it seems ok now.

Received on Saturday, 9 November 2002 10:18:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:18 UTC