Re: keep RDFS a separate layer from RDF

At 12:28 14/07/03 -0400, Frank Manola wrote:
>In Section 4, there appears:
>
>"Used with the RDF/XML serialization, these URI prefix strings
>correspond to XML namespace names [XML-NS] associated with the RDF core
>vocabulary terms."
>
>This seems to suggest that the two things we have to try to distinguish
>are "the RDF core" and RDF schema, and that there are differences
>between "RDF", "RDF core", and "RDF Schema". If there are such
>differences, could you say what they are?  In the Primer, I've been
>trying to keep distinct "RDF" and "RDF Schema" (the word "core" doesn't
>appear, except in connection with the name of the WG).  If there's no
>difference between "RDF" and "RDF core" (as being the language for which
>Concepts defines the abstract syntax and Syntax defines the RDF/XML
>syntax), then I'd sure suggest deleting the word "core", as causing
>potential questions.

Er, yes.  That was attempting to follow the semantics spec, where 
entailments are dealt with in terms of simple-, RDF- and RDFS-.  I also 
seem to have used terminology inconsistently :-(

I think this could be improved, e.g. revising the section 1 paragraph you 
quote to read something like:
[[
The framework is designed so that vocabularies can be layered on top of
the basic RDF language.  The RDF vocabulary definition language (RDF 
schema) [RDF-VOCABULARY] is the first such vocabulary. Others (cf. OWL 
[OWL] and the applications mentioned in the primer [RDF-PRIMER]) are in 
development.
]]
and changing later use of RDF core to be just "RDF".

I feel too close to judge if this is a needed editorial change at this 
stage, though I do feel inclined to make it.

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9  A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E

Received on Monday, 14 July 2003 13:51:46 UTC