--- a/rdf-new/index.html Tue Dec 10 23:13:46 2013 -0500
+++ b/rdf-new/index.html Wed Dec 11 12:30:28 2013 -0500
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
localBiblio: localBibliography,
// specification status (e.g. WD, LC, WG-NOTE, etc.). If in doubt use ED.
- specStatus: "ED",
+ specStatus: "FPWD",
// the specification's short name, as in http://www.w3.org/TR/short-name/
shortName: "rdf11-new",
@@ -136,21 +136,27 @@
of RDF ("RDF Semantics") [[!RDF11-MT]]</li>
<li>Specifications of concrete syntaxes for RDF, such as Turtle
[[!TURTLE]], TriG [[!TRIG]], N-Triples [[!N-TRIPLES]],
- N-Quads [[!N-QUADS]] and JSON-LD [[!JSON-LD]]</li>
+ N-Quads [[!N-QUADS]] and JSON-LD [[!JSON-LD]]. RDFa [[!RDFA-PRIMER]]
+ is also a concrete syntax for RDF, but it was not defined
+ by the RDF Working Group.</li>
<li>An RDF Vocabulary Description Language, RDF Schema
[[!RDF-SCHEMA]]</li>
</ul>
- <p> </p>
+ <p>The following prefixes are used in this document:</p>
+
+ <table class="simple">
+ <caption>Prefixes and IRIs</caption>
+ <tr><th>Namespace prefix</th><th>Namespace IRI</th><th>RDF vocabulary</th></tr>
+ <tr><td>rdf</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"><code>http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#</code></a></td><td>The RDF built-in vocabulary [[RDF-SCHEMA]]</td></tr>
+ <tr><td>xsd</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"><code>http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#</code></a></td><td>The <a>RDF-compatible XSD types</a></td></tr>
+ </table>
</section>
<section id="section-abstract-syntax">
<h2>Abstract Syntax</h2>
-
- <p class="issue">Appendix A of Concepts (http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/CR-rdf11-concepts-20131105/#changes)
- is overcome by this document. It should be removed in favor of a reference to this Note.</p>
<subsection id="identifiers">
@@ -186,7 +192,7 @@
"`", ‘"’ (double quote), and " " (space)
</td>
<td>
- None; percent-encoding must be used as described in section 2.1 of [RFC3986].
+ None; percent-encoding must be used as described in section 2.1 of [[!RFC3986]].
</td>
<tr>
<tr>
@@ -241,7 +247,7 @@
Literals with a language tag did not have a datatype URI.
</td>
<td>
- Literals with language tags now have the datatype IRI rdf:langString.
+ Literals with language tags now have the datatype IRI <code>rdf:langString</code>.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
@@ -254,7 +260,7 @@
<td>
Literals all have datatypes; serializations or other implementations
might choose to support syntax for simple literals, but only as synonyms
- for xsd:string literals.
+ for <code>xsd:string</code> literals.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
@@ -262,9 +268,9 @@
Control codes in the #x0-#x1F range were permitted.
</td>
<td>
- The xsd:string datatype does not permit the #x0 character, and implementations
+ The <code>xsd:string</code> datatype does not permit the #x0 character, and implementations
might not permit control codes in the #x1-#x1F range. A literal with type
- xsd:string containing the #x0 character is ill-typed.
+ <code>xsd:string</code> containing the #x0 character is ill-typed.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
@@ -273,19 +279,19 @@
</td>
<td>
Permitted language tags that adhered to the generic tag/subtag syntax
- of language tags, but were not well-formed according to [BCP47].
+ of language tags, but were not well-formed according to [[!BCP47]].
</td>
<td>
- Language tags must be well-formed according to [BCP47].
+ Language tags must be well-formed according to [[!BCP47]].
</td>
</tr>
</table>
- <p>Planned updates to DOM version 4 [DOM4] are not complete as of this writing. The Working
- Group decided to follow the changes to the DOM in order to support the new datatype rdf:HTML.
- The unfinished status of DOM version 4 puts both rdf:HTML and rdf:XMLLiteral at risk in RDF
- 1.1 Concepts, but clarifies functionality deemed to be useful for those including fragments
- of XML and HTML content in RDF serialization formats.</p>
+ <p>Planned updates to DOM version 4 [[!DOM4]] are not complete as of this writing. The Working
+ Group decided to follow the changes to the DOM in order to support the new datatype <code>rdf:HTML</code>.
+ The unfinished status of DOM version 4 is why both <code>rdf:HTML</code> and <code>rdf:XMLLiteral</code> are non-normative
+ in RDF 1.1 Concepts. RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax clarifies functionality deemed to be
+ useful for those including fragments of XML and HTML content in RDF serialization formats.</p>
</subsection>
@@ -313,13 +319,13 @@
RDF-compatible datatypes:</p>
<ul>
- <li>xsd:duration</li>
- <li>xsd:dayTimeDuration</li>
- <li>xsd:yearMonthDuration</li>
- <li>xsd:dateTimeStamp</li>
+ <li><code>xsd:duration</code></li>
+ <li><code>xsd:dayTimeDuration</code></li>
+ <li><code>xsd:yearMonthDuration</code></li>
+ <li><code>xsd:dateTimeStamp</code></li>
</ul>
- <p>Support for rdf:XMLLiteral support is now optional. Technically, support for
+ <p>Support for <code>rdf:XMLLiteral</code> support is now optional. Technically, support for
any individual datatype is optional and therefore may not be present in a given
implementation. RDF-conformant specifications may require specific datatype maps.</p>
@@ -345,23 +351,27 @@
<section id="section-semantics">
- <h2>Changes in RDF 1.1 Semantics</h2>
+ <h2>Semantics</h2>
<p>Most of the changes between RDF and RDF 1.1 do not have any effect on
- implementations of entailment, but there are a few minor changes.</p>
+ implementations of entailment.</p>
- <p>The sequence in which the versions of entailment are defined has changed.
- Datatype entailment is now defined on top of simple entailment, and then
- RDF and RDFS entailment are defined. Datatype entailment formally refers
- to a set of 'recognized' datatypes, replacing the old datatype maps, but
- this does not have any effect on implementation.</p>
+ <p>Datatype entailment formally refers to a set of 'recognized' datatypes,
+ replacing datatype maps in RDF 1.0 Semantics, but this does not have any
+ effect on implementation.</p>
+
+ <p>Datatype entailment formally refers to a set of 'recognized' datatype IRIs.
+ The RDF 1.0 Semantics used the concept of a datatype map: in the new semantic
+ description, this is the mapping from recognized IRIs to the datatypes they
+ identify. This change does not have any effect on implementation or semantic
+ entailments.</p>
- <p>RDF entailment has two required datatypes xsd:string and rdf:langString
+ <p>RDF entailment has two required datatypes <code>xsd:string</code> and <code>rdf:langString</code>
which must be recognized, but this doesn't appreciably add to RDF
entailment as these two datatypes replace plain literals.</p>
<p>One change that does affect entailment is that graphs containing invalid
- literals (e.g., "a"^^xsd:integer) are immediately inconsistent for
+ literals (e.g., <code>"a"^^xsd:integer</code>) are immediately inconsistent for
recognized datatypes, even in sub-RDFS entailment regimes.</p>
<p>RDF 1.1 includes RDF Datasets. However, the semantics of RDF Datasets in