W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Comments for WD-rdf-concepts-20030123

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 13:12:01 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org


Thank you for your comments.  I think there's nothing controversial here, 
and propose to adopt them as offered.

Brian:  I'm not sure we need to raise a tracking issue here, as the 
comments are all editorial in nature... or do we?


At 09:50 PM 2/23/03 -0800, Susan Lesch wrote:

>These are minor editorial comments for your "Resource Description
>Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax" Last Call Working Draft [1].
>minor typos:
>s/references.The/references. The/
>s/it's use/its use/
>s/website/Web site/
>s/XML Namespaces/Namespaces in XML/
>s/Normal Form C/Normalization Form C/
>in 6.5.1 s/RDF Literals/RDF literals/
>in 6.5.2 s/RDF Graphs/RDF graphs/
>in 7 s/RDF URI Reference/RDF URI reference/
>s/itself, at least, also/itself, at least, and also/
>cite { color: navy } is nice but close to link blue. I'd pick another
>color not used for links in the W3C style sheet. What does navy mean?
>(It appears in both normative and informative sections.)
>     The framework is designed so that vocabularies can be layered on
>     top of a core. The RDF core and RDF vocabulary definition (RDF
>     schema) languages [RDF-VOCABULARY] are the first such vocabularies.
>sounds like a core layered on a core. I'm not sure if that is what you
>This sentence:
>     A convention used by some linear representations of an RDF graph to
>     allow several statements to reference the same blank node is to use
>     a blank node identifier, which is a local identifier that can be
>     distinguished from all URIs and literals.
>could read something like:
>     To allow several statements to reference the same blank node, some
>     linear representations of an RDF graph use a blank node identifier.
>     This local identifier can be distinguished from all URIs and literals.
>Please avoid we (see http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#ref-PRONOUNS).
>I think you can say (without the we):
>     assume that the URI part (i.e. excluding fragment identifier)
>     indicates a Web resource with an RDF representation
>In 3.1, property is aka predicate and in 6.1, predicate is aka property.
>I would say this the same way both times.
>[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-concepts-20030123/
>Best wishes for your project,
>Susan Lesch           http://www.w3.org/People/Lesch/
>mailto:lesch@w3.org              tel:+1.858.483.4819
>World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)    http://www.w3.org/

Graham Klyne
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:20:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:02 UTC