--- a/rdf-primer/index.html Tue Nov 19 23:34:21 2013 +0100
+++ b/rdf-primer/index.html Wed Nov 20 00:04:13 2013 +0100
@@ -297,7 +297,7 @@
non-ASCII characters to be used in the IRI character string. IRIs are specified
in RFC 3987 [[!RFC3987]].
- <p>IRIs can appear in all three positions of a triple. </p>
+ <p>IRIs can appear in <strong>all three positions</strong> of a triple. </p>
<p>IRIs can be used to identify both documents
(e.g. a Web page) and things (e.g. a person).
@@ -343,13 +343,13 @@
<code>rdf:langString</code> to language-tagged literals.</p>
<p class="note">The 2004 version of RDF contained the notion of a
- "plain literal" with no datatype. This feature has been removed as the
+ "plain literal" with no datatype. This feature has been removed, as the
distinction between "plain" literals and literals with datatype
<code>string</code> was confusing. RDF syntaxes such as Turtle allow
writing literals without an explicit datatype and treat this
as syntactic sugar for a <code>string</code> datatype.</p>
- <p>Literals may only appear in the object position of a triple.</p>
+ <p>Literals may only appear in the <strong>object position</strong> of a triple.</p>
<p>The RDF Concepts document provides a
<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-Datatypes">list
@@ -371,7 +371,7 @@
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-blank-nodes">"blank
nodes"</a> in RDF. </p>
- <p>Blank nodes can appear in the subject and object position of
+ <p>Blank nodes can appear in the <strong>subject and object</strong> position of
a triple. They can be used
to denote resources without explicitly naming them with an
IRI.</p>
@@ -822,10 +822,10 @@
<h2>Semantics of RDF Graphs</h2>
- <p class="note">Readers should view this section as optional.</p>
+ <p class="note">Optional section</p>
- <p>RDF is grounded in a formal semantics which is specified in the RDF
- Semantics [[RDF11-MT]] document. This document takes a logical stance on RDF
+ <p>RDF is grounded in a formal model-theoretic semantics which is specified in the RDF
+ Semantics document [[RDF11-MT]]. This document takes a logical stance on RDF
graphs; it specifies truth-preserving conditions of RDF graphs as
well as valid derivations from RDF graphs. Such logical
consequences are called <a
@@ -844,11 +844,11 @@
<p class="note"</p>RDF Semantics distinguishes
a number of different "entailment regimes". For example, there
are "simple" entailments that are true for every RDF graph,
- as well as entailments based on datatypes. Technically speaking,
+ as well as entailments based on datatype semantics. Technically speaking,
the entailment in the example
above is not sanctioned by the basic RDF model, but stems from the
semantic extension of RDF with the RDF Schema vocabulary. For detailed
- iinformation about entailment regimes and semantic extensions
+ information about entailment regimes and semantic extensions
please consult the RDF Semantics document [[RDF11-MT]]. </p>
<p class="note">As we say in the earlier <a
@@ -860,15 +860,17 @@
<pre>
<code>ex:Bob ex:Age "forty"^^xsd:integer . </code>
</pre>
- <p>leads to a logical inconsistency, because the value does not
- abide by the constrinats posed by the XML Schema datatype <a
+ <p>leads to a logical inconsistency, because the literal does not
+ abide by the constraints associated with the XML Schema datatype <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#integer">integer</a>.</p>
- <p>@@ Tools </p>
+ <p class="note">RDF tools may not recognize all datatypes. As a
+ minimum, tools are required to support the datatypes for string literals
+ and language-taged literals.</p>
<p>Unlike many other data
- modelling languages, RDF Schema allows the same entity to be used both as
- class and as proerty. Therefore, RDF semantics views the following graph
+ modeling languages, RDF Schema allows the same entity to be used both as
+ class and as property. Therefore, RDF semantics views the following graph
as valid:</p>
<pre>
<code>ex:Marriage rdf:type rdf:Property .</code>