- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 16:29:16 +0100
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
"representation of statements" here seems fine to me, and somewhat easier to read. I don't understand the problem. #g -- At 09:08 09/04/2003 +0300, Jeremy Carroll wrote: >Concerning section 3.2 >I think these changes would be better logged as miscellaneous editorial. >They are quite minor. >As always I dislike your decision to use UK case conventions on headings >rather than US ones. Not that I am pro-american, simply for consistency with >W3C house style. > >(This is more positive than I was last night about this section). > >You missed one change required by williams-01 >[[ Note that such blank node identifiers are not part >of the RDF abstract syntax, and the representation of statements containing >blank nodes is entirely dependent on the particular concrete syntax used. >]] > >'statements' is incorrect. suggest >"representation of statements" => "concrete representation of triples" > >Jeremy > >.. >. ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org> PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9 A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2003 13:02:39 UTC