- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 08:55:51 -0400 (EDT)
- To: dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
I view the following message sent to www-rdf-comments@w3.org as a substantive comment. However, I believe that it has not generated an entry on the last call comments issues list. Please add it to this list. Peter F. Patel-Schneider Bell Labs Research Lucent Technologies From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Comment on Last Call Working Draft of RDF Syntax document concerning blank node identifiers Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 15:15:30 +0000 > >>>"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" said: > > > > > > The handling of blank nodes is still problematic in the LCC version of the > > RDF Syntax document. > > > > The intent is clear. Each nodeElement that does not otherwise get a > > subject is given a blank node identifier as a subject. The string-value of > > this blank node identifer is to be different from the string-value of every > > other blank node identifier resulting from the parsing of the RDF/XML > > document. > > > > > > However, the document does not follow this intent. > > <snip/> > > I feel it does and although we've already discussed this in earlier > messages, I propose to address this by adding the following > clarifications in the sections you mentioned: > > > 5.2 Identifiers - Blank Node Identifiers > http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030123/#section-Identifiers > > I will try to improve the second paragraph to make it clearer how the > algorithm used for generating / constructing concrete blank node > identfifiers must not result in erroneously merged blank nodes in the > graph. If you have specific wording suggestions, they would be > useful for me to consider. I cannot work on the exact new set of > words at this time, but will look at it in a few weeks. > > > 6.1.7 Blank Node Identifier Event > http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030123/#section-blank-nodeid-event > > Add a note that the generated blank node identifier may be not be the > exact concatentation here but may be generated by any algorithm as > discussed in 5.2, already pointed to here. > > > 6.3 Grammar Notation > http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030123/#section-Infoset-Grammar-Notation > > Add a pointer from the definition of bnodeid in the notation to point > directly to the 5.2 blank node identifiers section, to be amended as > described above. > > Dave
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2003 08:56:09 UTC