- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:29:39 +0000
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>>>pat hayes said: > --============_-1176279589==_ma============ > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" > > 1. section 2.1 > > para 1 delete 'also' Fixed. > para 3 > "A graph can be considered a sequence of paths of the form Node, Arc, > Node, Arc, Node, Arc, ... which walk the entire graph." > > reads oddly to me: it suggests that all graphs must be a single > connected path. In fact, most graphs cannot be traversed in this way > (without backtracking, at any rate). Maybe if you said "....a > collection of paths.... which together cover the entire graph" it > would read better. > > Minor point. That's OK. I kept rewording that sentence and never got it right, gave up. Thanks for the fix - "collection" and "cover" are better. > On the whole, a *super* document. First time I have ever understood > what 'striped syntax' means. Ha ha. Thanks Dave
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 06:30:45 UTC