Skip to content

Adds selected issue markers and removes those already closed. #130

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 17, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
19 changes: 17 additions & 2 deletions spec/index.html
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -132,6 +132,7 @@ <h3>Graph-based Data Model</h3>
<a>RDF graph</a>: <a>IRIs</a>, <a>literals</a>,
<a>blank nodes</a>, and <a>triple terms</a>.</p>

<p class="issue" data-number="129">There is a mixture of "Abstract Syntax" and "Data Model". We should have a consistent way to say "Abstract Syntax" vs "Data Model". One way is to use "Abstract Syntax" as the basis of semantics and usually say "Data Model" in Concepts otherwise.</p>
</section>

<section id="resources-and-statements">
@@ -446,6 +447,8 @@ <h3>Equivalence, Entailment and Inconsistency</h3>
of the world that would make the expression true.</dd>
</dl>

<p class="issue" data-number="118"></p>

<p>An <span id="dfn-entailment-regime"><!-- obsolete term --></span><dfn data-cite="RDF12-SEMANTICS#dfn-entailment-regime">entailment regime</dfn> [[RDF12-SEMANTICS]] is a specification that
defines precise conditions that make these relationships hold.
RDF itself recognizes only some basic cases of entailment, <a>equivalence</a>
@@ -511,6 +514,8 @@ <h3>RDF Documents and Syntaxes</h3>
and still the subject of group discussion. An alternative to conformance
levels, "profiles", may be adopted instead, abandoned, or described in
another specification.</p>
<p class="issue" data-number="70">
Change "Classic Conformance" to "Basic Conformance" and define them as profiles.</p>

<section id="rdf-strings">
<h3>Strings in RDF</h3>
@@ -977,6 +982,13 @@ <h3>Graph Comparison</h3>
in <var>G</var> can be replaced with
a new blank node to give <var>G'</var>. Graph isomorphism
is needed to support the RDF Test Cases [[RDF11-TESTCASES]] specification.</p>

<div class="issue" data-number="128">
Graph isomorphism needs the following extra clause:
<ul>
<li>M(tt) is the triple term ( M(s), M(p), M(o) ) for tt a triple term of the form (s, p, o)</li>
</ul>
</div>
</section>
</section>

@@ -1286,6 +1298,7 @@ <h3>The XML Schema Built-in Datatypes</h3>
datatype <a data-cite="xmlschema11-2#decimal"><code>xsd:decimal</code></a>
can be used to accurately capture arbitrary decimal numbers.</p>

<p class="issue" data-number="92"></p>
</section>

<section>
@@ -1694,6 +1707,10 @@ <h3>The <code>rdf:JSON</code> Datatype</h3>
</ul>
</dd>
</dl>
<p class="issue" data-number="116">The issue refers to the use
of <a data-cite="INFRA#ordered-map">ordered map</a>
from [[INFRA]] for describing the value space of <a data-cite="RFC8259#section-4">JSON Objects</a>
and suggests defining a new datatype for unordered maps.</p>
</section>

</section>
@@ -1786,8 +1803,6 @@ <h2>Internationalization Considerations</h2>
<a data-cite="JSON-LD11#the-i18n-namespace">i18n namespace</a> to use
a datatype to specify both the base direction an <a>language tag</a>
of an <a>RDF literal</a>.</p>

<p class="issue" data-number="9"></p>
</section>

<section id="iri-abnf" class="appendix informative">